Gujarat High Court
Akhil Gujarat Apang Sanstha Karmachari ... vs State Of Gujarat & 2 on 27 February, 2017
Author: P.P.Bhatt
Bench: P.P.Bhatt
C/SCA/5619/2004 ORDER
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 5619 of 2004
==========================================================
AKHIL GUJARAT APANG SANSTHA KARMACHARI MANDAL &
3....Petitioner(s)
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & 2....Respondent(s)
==========================================================
Appearance:
DELETED for the Petitioner(s) No. 1 - 2 , 4
MR BY MANKAD, ADVOCATE for the Petitioner(s) No. 3
MS ASMITA PATEL, ADDITIONAL GOVERNMENT PLEADER for the
Respondent(s) No. 1 - 3
==========================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.P.BHATT
Date : 27/02/2017
ORAL ORDER
1. The petitioner, by way of this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has prayed for issuance of writ/order directing the respondents to grant the benefit of Higher Grade Pay scales at the interval of 9-20-31 years to the petitioners as per Government Resolution dated 16.08.1994.
2. It is also prayed that the respondents may be Page 1 of 9 HC-NIC Page 1 of 9 Created On Mon Aug 14 00:36:53 IST 2017 C/SCA/5619/2004 ORDER directed to comply with the Government Resolution dated 14.10.1995 to pay salaries to the petitioners every month regularly.
3. It is the case of the petitioner that he was serving as teacher in the institution imparting education to the physically handicapped students i.e. deaf and dumb. According to the petitioner, he has been given the benefit of first higher grade scale in light of the Government Resolution dated 16.08.1994. But subsequently, further benefit of Higher Grade Pay scale was denied.
4. It is the case of the petitioner that in Special Civil Application No. 6638 of 1992 vide order dated 22.04.1994, this Court (Coram : Honourable Mr. Justice J.M. Panchal), directed the State Government to grant all the benefits of Higher Grade Pay scale in compliance of the Government Resolution dated 16.08.1994. According to the petitioner, specific direction was given to the State Government to grant all the benefits of Higher Grade Pay scale on completion of 9 years, 20 years and 31 years as the case may be to the petitioner and other similarly Page 2 of 9 HC-NIC Page 2 of 9 Created On Mon Aug 14 00:36:53 IST 2017 C/SCA/5619/2004 ORDER situated teachers of deaf and dumb school. Thereafter, in another petition bearing No. Special Civil Application No.11651 of 2004 with Special Civil Application No.13746 of 2005, this Court (Coram : Honourable Mr. Justice Jayant Patel) vide order dated 04.02.2006, directed the respondents that the teaching staff of Ashram Salas would be entitled to the benefit of the Government Resolution dated 16.08.1994 at par with the teaching staff of Private Primary Schools, and accordingly, a direction was given to the respondent authority to consider the case of the petitioner therein and extend the benefit of Higher Pay scale in light of Government Resolution dated 16.08.1994 and the action of the respondent-authorities whereby benefit of higher grade was denied to the teaching staff of Ashram Salas vide Resolution dated 16.08.1994 was declared as discriminatory and unconstitutional.
5. It is stated that despite directions issued by this Court during the pendency of this petition directing the respondent-authorities to take decision on the issue of granting Higher Pay scale on Page 3 of 9 HC-NIC Page 3 of 9 Created On Mon Aug 14 00:36:53 IST 2017 C/SCA/5619/2004 ORDER completion of 20 and 31 years, the Government has taken a decision by order dated 27.08.2013 rejecting the claim of the petitioner without proper appreciation of the facts and circumstances involved in this case as also the orders passed by this Court referred herein above.
6. The learned Advocate for the petitioner vehemently submits that the petitioner is eligible and entitled to get the benefit of higher grade scale in light of Government Resolution dated 16.08.1994, and accordingly, the benefit of First Higher Grade Scale was given to the petitioner. But subsequently, the benefit which was due and payable on completion of 20 years of service was not extended to the petitioner. In this context, learned Advocate for the petitioner has referred to and relied upon the orders dated 22.04.1994 and 04.02.2006 passed by this Court in Special Civil Application No. 6638 of 1992 as well as the order passed in Special Civil Application No. 11651 of 2004 with Special Civil Application No. 13746 of 2005.
Page 4 of 9 HC-NIC Page 4 of 9 Created On Mon Aug 14 00:36:53 IST 2017 C/SCA/5619/2004 ORDER
7. It is also submitted that based on the aforesaid two orders passed by this Court during the pendency of this petition, directions were given to the respondent State Government to consider the case of the petitioner. However, without proper appreciation of the fact as well as the settled legal position, the respondent- authorities denied the benefit of higher grade pay scale to the petitioner.
8. Learned Assistant Government Pleader, Ms. Asmita Patel appearing for the State tried to justify the order passed by the respondent State Government dated 27.08.2013, whereby the prayer made by the petitioner has been considered, and decision was taken to reject the said demand.
9. Learned Assistant Government Pleader, Ms. Asmita Patel submits that the petitioner is serving in a grant -in- aid school, and therefore, the said benefit cannot be extended to the petitioner in light of the Government Resolution dated 16.08.1994. Page 5 of 9 HC-NIC Page 5 of 9 Created On Mon Aug 14 00:36:53 IST 2017 C/SCA/5619/2004 ORDER
10. It is also submitted that the respondent State Government has taken the decision after careful consideration of the facts and circumstances as also the orders passed by this Court in Special Civil Application No. 6638 of 1992 as well as the decision passed in Special Civil Application No. 11651 of 2004 with Special Civil Application No. 13746 of 2005.
11. In response to above submission learned advocate for the petitioner submits that while disposing of Special Civil Application No. 11651 of 2004 with Special Civil Application No. 13746 of 2005, in paragraph 22 of the said order, the action of the respondent-authorities of denying the teaching staff of Ahram Salas vide Government Resolution dated 16.08.1994 was declared as discriminatory and unconstitutional, but the said part has been misread by the respondent-authorities and interpretation of the said observation made in the order is made in a negative manner.
12. It is submitted that the order passed by this in Special Civil Application No. 6638 of 1992 as well as Page 6 of 9 HC-NIC Page 6 of 9 Created On Mon Aug 14 00:36:53 IST 2017 C/SCA/5619/2004 ORDER the order passed in Special Civil Application No. 11651 of 2004 with Special Civil Application No. 13746 of 2005 is very clear, whereby the respondent State Government was directed to consider the case of the petitioner in light of Government Resolution dated 16.08.1994.
13. In view of the above submission and looking to the facts and circumstances of the present case, it appears that present petitioner is serving as a teacher in grant -in- aid school, which is imparting education to the deaf and dumb students and the fact regarding extension of benefit of First Higher Grade to the petitioner on completion of 9 years is not disputed. The petitioner has availed the benefit of Higher Grade on completion of 9 years of service as per Government Resolution dated 16.08.1994.
14. Moreover, during the pendency of this petition a direction was given to the respondent State Government to consider the case of the petitioner in light of decision taken by this Court in Special Civil Application No. 6638 of 1992 as well as the Page 7 of 9 HC-NIC Page 7 of 9 Created On Mon Aug 14 00:36:53 IST 2017 C/SCA/5619/2004 ORDER order passed in Special Civil Application No. 11651 of 2004 with Special Civil Application No. 13746 of 2005.
15. However, without proper appreciation of the observations made by this Court, the respondent State Authorities rejected the claim of the petitioner for getting benefit of higher Grade scale. It further appears that the aforesaid two decisions rendered by this Court have attained finality and the said orders were not challenged by State Government. Under the circumstances, the petitioner, being a similarly situated teacher, is eligible and entitled to get benefit of 2nd and 3rd Higher Grade Scale in light of Government Resolution dated 16.08.1994. The clause No. 3(36) of the Government Resolution dated 16.08.1994, makes it amply clear that the said Resolution is applicable for grant-in-aid school also.
16. Under the circumstances, the case of the petitioner deserves to be allowed and respondents are required to be directed to give benefit of Higher Page 8 of 9 HC-NIC Page 8 of 9 Created On Mon Aug 14 00:36:53 IST 2017 C/SCA/5619/2004 ORDER Grade to the petitioner within stipulated period.
17. In view of the above discussion, the decision taken by the respondent State Government, during the pendency of this petition, dated 27.08.2013 is ordered to be set aside. The respondent-State Government is directed to grant benefit of Higher Grade to the petitioners and shall make payment of differential amount of salary within a period of one month from the date of receipt of the order. Rule is made absolute, accordingly.
Direct service is permitted.
(P.P.BHATT, J.) Alok Page 9 of 9 HC-NIC Page 9 of 9 Created On Mon Aug 14 00:36:53 IST 2017