Andhra HC (Pre-Telangana)
Principal, University Of Hyderabad ... vs G. Talpa Sai And Others on 24 June, 1997
Equivalent citations: 1998(4)ALD548, 1997(4)ALT643
Author: J. Chelameswar
Bench: J. Chelameswar
ORDER P.S. Mishra, CJ.
1. This appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent has arisen out of a proceeding under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
2. Petitioner-respondents, it is not in dispute, are employees in the University of Hyderabad Campus School, which is affiliated to Central Board of Secondary Education, New Delhi. According to the petitioner-respondents, the school is governed by the norms prescribed for Kendriya Vidyalayas and as per the Kendriya Vidyalaya Sanghatan Regulations, the salaries for the post of T.G.Teachers, the posts of the petitioner-respondents being under the said category, are in the scale of pay of Rs. 1400-2600. Petitioner-respondents, it is said, however, were appointed after a due selection to various posts vide a notification dated 25-7-1989 of the School (University) in the scale of pay of Rs. 1200-2040. They could know of the anamoly in the scale of pay only after being in the service and they have ever since been agitating and making representations for being granted the scale of pay of Rs. 1400-2600, which according to them is in accordance with Kendriya Vidyalaya Sanghatan norms, as also per the recommendations of IV Central Pay Commission, Following the representations by the petitioner-respondents, Chairman of the School Managing Committee constituted a sub-committee to go into the details and submit a report and the Committee, which met on 24-4-1992 submitted its report on 7-5-1992 recommending the scale of pay of Rs. 1400-2600 as recommended by the IV Central Pay Commission report vide G,O.No.F.5-180/86, UT-I, dated I2-8-19S7. After considering the report of the sub-committee, the Managing Committee of the School resolved on 304-1993 to extend to the petitioner-respondents the scale of pay as recommended by the sub-committee and delete the same from the upgradation from secondary to senior secondary. When, however, the said resolution of the Managing Committee was not implemented, petitioner-respondents moved this Court, appellants who were respondents in the writ petition were called upon to show-cause and as the Court advanced to debate the claim of the petitioner-respondents, they maintained before this Court that the scale of pay duly advertised, to which the petitioner-respondents were recruited, was Rs. 1200-2040 and since petitioner-respondents accepted the said appointments for reason? alluded from certain instances taken place in the Kendriya Vidyalaya Sanghatan or the Pay Commission Report, cannot claim any absorption in posts which are in different or higher scale of pay. Learned single Judge has gone into the matter in some details and stated as follows:
"Now the question arises as to whether the petitioners have volunteered to accept the posts with the lower scale.
It is no doubt that the respondents did issue notification in 'Deccan Chronicle' inviting applications for different categories of teachers with prescribed qualifications for being appointed as Secondary School teachers. When the petitioners herein applied for the said posts, they were not aware actually what scale of pay the posts carry for which they are making applications. Without knowing the scale of pay for the posts, they did apply and they were selected and have been working in the school in their own capacity. But, when the anamoly in the pay scale was noticed by them, they made representation to the school authorities. It is submitted by the learned Counsel for the petitioners that the sub-committee did recommend for upgradation of the posts and to grant higher pay scale to the petitioners herein, but it was contended by the learned Counsel, that mere is no question of upgradation of the posts as the school in question is affiliated to Kendriya Vidyalaya, a Central Board of Education, and as such, they arc bound by the affiliation bye-laws. My attention was invited by the learned Counsel to pages 91 to 92 of the affiliation bye-laws, which prescribe the minimum qualification to the posts which are being held by the petitioners herein. My attention was also invited by the learned Counsel to page 97 of Appendix 1 of the said bye-laws, which says that the salary to be paid to the staff is, scale of pay and allowances which should at least be at par with corresponding categories of teachers employed in Government institutions.
Now the question arises as to what pay scale can be made applicable to the petitioners in question.
Learned Counsel for the petitioners herein invited my attention to the affiliation granted by the Central Board of Secondary Education. The teachers who are appointed for drawing, craft and physical education fall under the category of Group 'C' as mentioned on printed page No.445 of Central Board of Secondary Education and the corresponding pay scale is given as Rs.1400-2600/-.
A query was made by this Court with the Counsel for the respondents as to when the school had taken decision to adopt all the norms prescribed by the Central Board of Secondary Education, what made the respondents herein to advertise the posts with lesser scale of pay. Learned Counsel for the respondents was not in a position to give the appropriate reply but only stated that the petitioners did accept the posts with lesser scale of pay with open eyes. This Court feels that it is not the proper answer to the query made by this Court when the Kendriya Vidyalaya has fixed the scale of pay as Rs. 1400-2600/-.
A further query was made by this Court as to whether the petitioners herein are teaching only to the primary section of the school or they arc also teaching to the secondary section of the school. Learned Counsel for the respondents replied that they are teaching to both sessions of the school.
Considering the reply given by the learned Counsel for the respondents, this Court is of the considered view that the pay scale of Rs. 1400-2600/- is the proper scale of pay which the petitioners are entitled. There is no question of upgrading the posts. The advertisement which was given by fixing the scale of pay at a lower level was itself a wrong advertisement. Therefore, this Court holds that the petitioners herein be paid the salary on par with the other teachers who are teaching different subjects in the same school.
Considering the above aspects of the matter, this Court directs the respondents herein to complete all the formalities of paying the higher scale of pay to the petitioners herein from the date of joining their service. The entire exercise has to be completed within a period of six months from the date of this order."
3. There can hardly be any exception to the view taken by the learned single Judge that the proper scale of pay, which the management of the school shall be extending to the petitioner-respondents is Rs.1400-2600/-and there has been some discrimination and if not actual discrimination in terms of Article 14 of the Constitution of India, which may prejudice the interests of the petitioners in paying to them in terms of scale of pay which is, no doubt, extended to the teachers and others working in the schools, but given them the scale of pay admissible to the schools run by the State Government. Appellants school is one governed, as stated above, by the regulations applicable to Kendriya Vidyalaya Schools run by Kendriya Vidyalaya Sanghatan. Thus, appellants were expected to give to the teachers the scale of pay which Kendriya Vidyalaya Sanghatan has been giving to the teachers of its own schools. Yet, it cannot be held that there has been any such right created in the petitioner-respondents only by dint of their being called to be appointed as teachers in the appellants school that in no case the management of school could not give to its teachers any other scale of pay. The management of the school undoubtedly could give to its teachers higher scale of pay than the teachers of the schools run by Kendriya Vidyala Sanghatan. It could for the said reason create a new scale of pay than the scale of pay created by the Kendriya Vidyalaya Sanghatan, which in course of time is found to be less than the scale of pay for the teachers of the schools of Kendriya Vidhyalaya Sanghatan. One feet, however, the appellants cannot deny that when the petitioner-respondents represented, the management of the school appointed a sub-committee and the subcommittee recommended that such teachers who were in the scale of pay of Rs. 1200-2040 should be given the scale of pay of Rs. 1400-2600; and the sub-committee's recommendations were accepted by the managing committee of the school. The management, may not, for the said reason, be obliged to burden itself with higher scale of pay from a date prior to the acceptance of the recommendations of the sub-committee, yet it has accepted the obligation for such a scale of pay to the petitioner-respondents and others similarly situated with effect from the date the managing committee resolved to take them in the scale of pay ofRs. 1400-2600/-. It is a fit case, in our opinion, thus for a modification in the direction of the learned single Judge to the effect that petitioner-respondents shall be admitted to the scale of pay of Rs. 1400-2600 with effect from the date of the resolution of the managing committee of the school, i.e. 30-4-1993 and accordingly fitted in the said scale of pay in such a manner that they are not made to suffer any loss of actual pay drawn by them and for the purpose of terminal benefits and seniority in the matter of appointment, they are deemed to have been admitted to the scale of pay of Rs. 1400-2600 continuously as directed by the learned single Judge. If there is any higher pay to which they are fitted in on account of the above direction in the scale of pay of Rs. 1400-2600, petitioner-respondents would be paid the difference within two months and shall thereafter be continuously paid new salary as above.
4. In the result, the appeal is allowed to the extent indicated above and the writ petition is accordingly disposed of.