Himachal Pradesh High Court
Pushap Raj Khimta S/O Dula Ram Khimta vs State Of H.P. & Other on 29 June, 2022
Author: Jyotsna Rewal Dua
Bench: Jyotsna Rewal Dua
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA
ON THE 29th DAY OF JUNE 2022
BEFORE
.
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTSNA REWAL DUA
CIVIL WRIT PETITION(ORIGINAL APPLICATION) No. 7661 OF 2019
Between:-
1. PUSHAP RAJ KHIMTA S/O DULA RAM KHIMTA
AGE ABOUT 46 YEARS OCCUPATION TGT
(ARTS) GHS GHARECH KUFRI U/C GSSS KUFRI
SHIMLA PERMANENT RESIDENT OF KHIMTA
NIWAS CEMETRY ROAD SANJAULI SHIMLA HP.
2. RAJESH KUMAR MOKTA S/O NAZAR LAL MOKTA
TGT (NM) GSSS LAKKAR BAZAAR SHIMLA HP
RESIDENT OF SUKHDHAM SANJAULI SHIMLA-6.
3. JATINDER THAKUR S/O D R THAKUR TGT (NM)
GHS KAITHU RESIDENT OF THAKUR NIWAS
NEAR BEAKTA HOUSE BELOW PL PALACE
SANJAULI SHIMLA.
4. MADAN LAL S/O SITA RAM TGT (NM) GSSS
THEOG DISTRICT SHIMLA HP PERMANENT
RESIDENT OF VILLAGE TIKKARI PO JAIS TEHSIL
THEOG DISTRICT SHIMLA H.P.
5. RAJINDER SINGH JHANGTA S/O ANANT RAM
JHANGTA TGT (NM) GHS DAMYANA VILL KUFTA
POST OFFICE GHOOND TEHSIL THEOG
DISTRICT SHIMLA HP
6. SUNIL DOGRA S/O KARAM CHAND DOGRA PGT
MATHS GSSS MATIYANA RESIDENT OF VILLAGE
JADOON PO BHALWAG TEHSIL KUMARSAIN
DISTRICT SHIMLA H.P.
7. RAM KUMAR S/O TULSI RAM TGT (NM) GMS
SALOHA U/C GSSS GHOOND RESIDENT OF
VILLAGE SAMLETA PO RISHIKESH TEHSIL
JHANDUTTA DISTRICT BILAPSUR HP.
::: Downloaded on - 04/07/2022 20:02:00 :::CIS
2
8. SURENDER SINGH S/O BANU LAL TGT (M) GSSS
DEHA RESIDENT OF VILLAGE CHANDNI PO
DEHA TEHSIL THEOG DISTRICT SHIMLA HP.
9. SURENDER SINGH S/O CHET RAM P.E.T GHS
.
KAITHU RESIDENT OF VILLAGE CHAMBAL PO
BALGHAR TEHSIL THEOG DISTRICT SHIMLA HP
10. PRABHA GAUTAM D/O CR VERMA TGT ARTS
GSSS SANJAULI RESIDENT OF GAUTAM NIWAS
CEMETRY ROAD SANJAULI SHIMLA.
11. PRAGTI CHAUHAN D/O RAM DYAL TGT MEDICAL
GHS GHARECH KUFRI RESIDENT OF VILLAGE
CHHOL PO KOTKHAI TEHSIL KOTKHAI SHIMLA.
12. RAJESH SHARMA S/O NIKKA RAM SHARMA
SINGH TGT ARTS GHS GHARECH KUFRI
TEHSIL THEOG DISTRICT SHIMLA HP
RESIDENT OF VILLAGE PUJAYALI PO BAROG
TEHSIL THEOG DISTRICT SHIMLA.
13. PARKASH CHAND DOGRA S/O LAXMI NAND
DOGRA TGT (MEDICAL) GSSS KIARA TEHSIL
THEOG DISTRICT SHIMLA HP R/O VILLAGE
JHAMOTI PO KIARA TEHSIL THEOG DISTRICT
SHIMLA HP.
14. NISHA SHARMA D/O DURGA DUTT SHARMA TGT
ARTS GHS BHARARI TEHSIL AND "DISTRICT
SHIMLA HP R/O VILLAGE SIBU PO AND TEHSIL
THEOG DISTRICT SHIMLA HP.
15. KRISHNA DEVI W/O MOHAN CHANDEL TGT
ARTS GSSS SANJAULI SHIMLA R/O VPO BAGRI
TEHSIL THEOG DISTRICT SHIMLA HP.
16. PRATAP SINGH S/O RAM SAHI RESIDENT OF
VILLAGE BATOG PO THEOG TEHSIL THEOG
DISTRICT SHIMLA HP AT PRESENT P.E.T GHS
ANNADALE SHIMLA
17. SUNIL S/O MOHAN LAL P.E.T GMS RULDU
BHATTA RESIDENT OF VILLAGE RIHAR PO
DHARECH TEHSIL THEOG DISTRICT SHIMLA HP.
18. SANDEEP SHARMA S/O BASANT LAL PGT
SANSKRIT RESIDENT OF VILLAGE DEORI P.O
BAGHAR TEHSIL KOTKHAI DISTRICT SHIMLA HP.
19. VINAY CHAUHAN S/O B R. CHAUHAN TGT (M)
GSSS BOILEAUGANJ RESIDENT OF VILLAGE
::: Downloaded on - 04/07/2022 20:02:00 :::CIS
3
THARALA TEHSIL KOTKHAI DISTRICT SHIMLA
HP.
20. RAJINDER KUMAR S/O PARAS RAM P.E.T GSSS
THEOG (GIRLS) RESIDENT OF VILLAGE JHAKRI
.
PO SIREON TEHSIL KOTKHAI DISTRICT SHIMLA
HP.
21. SATYA PRAKASH SHARMA S/O MOHAR SINGH
TGT (NM) GMS SAUN R/O VILLAGE "SLAWAKRA
PO DEEM TEHSIL JUBBAL DISTRICT SHIMLA HP.
22. SHIVESH SHARMA S/O KESHWA NAND PGT
GSSS CHEOG RESIDENT OF SHARMA NIWAS
LAKKAR BAZAAR SHIMLA.
23. SANJEEV KUMAR SHARMA S/O RAMKRISHAN
SHARMA P.ET GHS PATGEHAR RESIDENT OF
VILLAGE PATGEHAR PO MUNDAGHAT TEHSIL
AND DISTRICT SHIMLA HP.
24. PANKAJ JUSTA S/O CB JUSTA P.ET GMS PANJRI
RESIDENT OF VILLAGE PANOG P.O KOTKHAI
TEHSIL KOTKHAI DISTRICT SHIMLA HP.
25. DEVENDER CHANDEL S/O N.D CHANDEL P.E.T
GSSS THEOG RESIDENT OF VILLAGE DHAMPUR
TEHSIL THEOG DISTRICT SHIMLA HP.
26. SANDEEP BARET S/O R.S BARET TGT MEDICAL
GSSS THEOG RESIDENT OF VILLAGE MUSKAN
RESTAURANT PREM GHAT THEOG DISTRICT
SHIMLA HP.
27. NIRUPAMA THAKUR D/O YOGANAND SHARMA
TGT ARTS GSSS NEEN R/O SAI SADAN FIRST
FLOOR SANJAULI SHIMLA.
28. TARA CHAND SHARMA S/O SANT RAM C/O
VERMA NIWAS VILLAGE BADASH PO BADASH
SHIMLA 171003 AT PRESENT TGT ARTS GSSS
TOTU SHIMLA.
29. RAJEEV KUMAR S/O RAMESH KUMAR TGT(NM)
GSSS MUNDAGHAT RESIDENT OF VILLAGE
RAHU PO ZAR TEHSIL KUMARSIAN DISTRICT
SHIMLA.
30. SUSHMA SAUHTA WIFE OF YASHWANT SAUHTA
GHS JAKHU SHIMLA RESIDENT OF VPO DHAR
TEHSIL JUBBAL DISTRICT SHIMLA HP.
::: Downloaded on - 04/07/2022 20:02:00 :::CIS
4
31. TAPESH KUMAR SHARMA S/O KESHWA NAND
SHARMA RESIDENT OF VILLAGE KARANA PO
BHARANA TEHSIL THEOG DISTRICT SHIMLA AT
PRESENT TGT (ARTS) GSSS GADHAKUFRI
.
DISTRICT SHIMLA HP.
32. NAVEEN VERMA S/O MUNSHI RAM VERMA
PHYSICAL EDUCATION TEACHER GMS
CHAKKAR U/C GSSS BOILEAUGANJ
PERMANENT RESIDENT OF VPO KANDYALI
TEHSIL KUMARSAIN DISTRICT SHIMLA HP.
33. SANJEEV KUMAR KALTA S/O PREM SUKH
TGT(NM) GHS JAKHU SHIMLA R/O VILLAGE
BRALL PO JHARAG TESHIL ROHRU DISTRICT
SHIMLA HP.
.....PETITIONERS
(BY SH. MOHIT THAKUR, ADVOCATE)
AND
1. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH
THROUGH PRINCIPAL SECRETARY (EDUCATION)
GOVERNMENT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH
2. DIRECTOR OF HIGHER EDUCATION,
HP AT SHIMLA.
3. DIRECTOR OF ELEMENTARY EDUCATION HP
AT SHIMLA.
4. DEPUTY DIRECTOR ELEMENTARY EDUCATION SHIMLA
5. PRINCIPAL GSSS KUFRI/CONCERNED SCHOOL,
DISTRICT SHIMLA.
.....RESPONDENTS
(BY SH. NARENDER THAKUR, DEPUTY ADVOCATE
GENERAL)
Whether approved for reporting?
__________________________________________________
::: Downloaded on - 04/07/2022 20:02:00 :::CIS
5
This petition coming on for orders this day, the
Court passed the following:
.
ORDER
CMP No.261/2022
For the reasons stated in the application, the same is allowed and disposed of.
CWPOA No.7661/2019With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the matter is taken up for disposal today.
2. The matter pertains to grant of minimum of revised pay scale to the petitioners who were Para Teachers in the category of Trained Graduate Teachers, Physical Education Teachers & Post Graduate Teachers. The pay scale revised in the year 2006 (minimum of scale alongwith DA merger/grade pay) has been allowed to Para Teachers from 1.4.2010 onwards.
Petitioners' claim that they are entitled to the minimum of the revised pay scale of Rs.10,300-34,800/- with appropriate grade pay of the post w.e.f. 1.4.2007 to 31.3.2010.
The relief has been claimed on the strength of a judgment passed by the Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court in CWP No.4954/2012 titled Madan Lal Vs State of H.P. & other ::: Downloaded on - 04/07/2022 20:02:00 :::CIS 6 connected matter decided on 7.11.2012. Reliance has also been placed upon a judgment dated 13.12.2012 passed in a bunch of .
petitions with lead case bearing LPA No.105/2010 titled Rakesh Chand Vs. State of H.P. and other connected matters.
3. Contentions 3(i). Learned counsel for the petitioners argued that while deciding Madan Lal's case (supra) it was held that Para-
Teachers have been brought at par with contract teachers w.e.f.
1.4.2007. It was also held that all the benefits extended to the contract teachers be it a case of merger of dearness allowance or the case of revision of pay-scale, should be available to the Para-Teachers w.e.f. 1.4.2007.
3(ii). Learned counsel for the petitioners invited attention to the instructions dated 26.07.2014 issued by the respondents-
Education Department whereunder in purported compliance to the decision in Madan Lal's case (supra), the contract teachers (lecturers), who joined on or after 9.5.2006 were given 'initial of pay-scale of the year 1996 plus Dearness Pay (i.e. 50% of initial pay) as on 9.5.2006 i.e: Rs.6400 + 3200 = Rs.9600/- fixed'. The same benefit was also extended to the Para-Teachers (lecturers) ::: Downloaded on - 04/07/2022 20:02:00 :::CIS 7 w.e.f. 1.4.2007 to 31.03.2010. Learned counsel submitted that this benefit stands released to the petitioners.
.
3(iii). Learned counsel for the petitioner argued that the grievance of the petitioners is in respect of non-grant of initial of revised pay-scale (revised w.e.f. 1.1.2006) i.e. Rs.10,300/- that stood granted to the contract teachers, but not to the Para Teachers (petitioners herein) for the period 1.4.2007 to 31.3.2010. Inviting attention to communication dated 23.11.2013 issued by the respondents towards implementation of the judgment passed by the Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court in LPA No.105/2010, it was submitted that the initial of pay-scale i.e. Rs.6400/- fixed w.e.f. 1.1.1996 (6400-10640) has been revised to Rs.10,300/- (10,300/- 34800) w.e.f 1.1.2006 in case of contract teachers (Lecturers). The minimum of this revised pay-
scale, according to the submissions of learned counsel for the petitioners, also needs to be released to the petitioners for the period 1.4.2007 to 31.03.2010.
3(iv). Learned counsel for the petitioner also referred to a judgment dated 30.08.2012 passed in CWP No.7299/2012 whereunder alleged similarly situated petitioners belonging to TGT & C&V categories had inter alia prayed for grant of revised ::: Downloaded on - 04/07/2022 20:02:00 :::CIS 8 pay scale that had been released to Lecturers. This prayer was allowed in terms of decision in LPA No.105/2010. According to .
learned counsel, the said judgment has been implemented by the respondents in terms of Annexure R/2 dated 14.07.2021 and the petitioners (therein)/para teachers have been held entitled to the emoluments at par with contract teachers.
4. Learned Deputy Advocate General opposed the petitioners' prayer and argued that the judgments passed in Madan Lal's case and in LPA No.105/2010 (supra) stand complied with by the respondents. In LPA No. 105/2010, only the JBT teachers appointed on contract basis were held entitled to the initial of the pay-scale attached to the post of JBT teachers as revised from time to time with further directions that the principle that was applied in the case of JBT teachers in equal force would also apply to the School Lecturers appointed on contract basis. However, the benefit can not be allowed to the category of TGT teachers as the same was not allowed to this category in the judgment under reference.
5. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and on considering the documents on record, I am of the considered ::: Downloaded on - 04/07/2022 20:02:00 :::CIS 9 opinion that the petitioners have made out a case for the grant of claim in question for the following reasons:-
.
5(i) It is not in dispute that the petitioners were appointed as Para-Teachers and their services were regularized in the year 2014. On 7.4.2007, the respondent-State equated Para Teachers with the contract teachers w.e.f. 1.4.2007. On this basis, vacation salary was allowed to Para Teachers at par with contract teachers. The contract teachers were allowed the benefits of merger of Dearness Allowance with initial of the pay scale revised from time to time.
5(ii). While deciding Madan Lal's case (supra), it was noticed in the judgment that the State Government on 7.4.2007 had decided to grant same emoluments to the Para-Teachers as were being paid to the contract teachers w.e.f. 1.4.2007. The Hon'ble Court held in the judgment dated 7.11.2012 rendered in CWP No.4954/2012 (Madan Lal's case) that once the Para-
Teachers have been brought at par with contract teachers w.e.f.
1.4.2007 then all the benefits extended to the contract teachers should be made available to the Para Teachers w.e.f. 1.4.2007 in case of merger of D.A. or in case of revision of pay scale. The respondent/State was directed to issue instructions in terms of ::: Downloaded on - 04/07/2022 20:02:00 :::CIS 10 the judgment. Relevant part from the judgment in Madan Lal's case (supra) is extracted hereinafter:-
.
"3. In the matter of vacation salary, based on the judgment in Baldev Singh Vs. State of H.P., the Para Teachers have approached this Court and in various judgments, it has been held that they will also be entitled to vacation salary since they have been treated at par with the contract teachers.
4. In these cases, the petitioners have sought for the benefit of the decision of this Court in Nek Ram and others versus State of Himachal Pradesh and others in the matter of merger of 50% D.A. In some of the cases they have also sought for revision of the pay scale. Once the Para Teachers are brought at par with contract teachers w.e.f. 1.4.2007, all the benefits extended to the contract teachers should be available to the Para Teachers w.e.f. 1.4.2007 in the case of merger of D.A. or in the case of revision of pay scale.
5. Therefore, these writ petitions are disposed of with a direction to the Director Higher Education to issue appropriate instruction, if not already issued, within a month from today, to see that the Para Teachers are paid same emoluments as are given to the contract teachers in the respective categories w.e.f. 1.4.2007. In any of these cases, the para teachers have not been paid the vacation salary, the eligible vacation salary shall also be paid to them within a period of three months from the date of production of a copy of this judgment by the petitioner concerned before the competent authority."
Respondent/State while implementing the aforesaid decision granted the initial of the pay-scale of the year 1996 to ::: Downloaded on - 04/07/2022 20:02:00 :::CIS 11 Para Teachers w.e.f. 1.4.2007 to 31.3.2010 at par with contract teachers.
.
5(iii) In LPA No.105/2010 decided on 13.12.2012 alongwith bunch matters, the issue before the Hon'ble Court pertained to the claim made by the teachers appointed on contract basis for the minimum of the pay scale revised from time to time. The issue involved in the matter as noticed in the judgment is extracted hereinafter:-
"Whether the JBT teachers appointed on contract basis would be entitled to pay scale revised from time to time is the question raised in these cases. Learned Single Judge held in favour and hence the appeals by the State. LPA No. 105 of 2010 is filed against the judgment dated 15.6.2010 in CWP (T) No. 781 of 2008 titled Rakesh Chand and others vs. State of H.P. and others. All other appeals except LPA No. 108 of 2012 are filed by the H.P. State Electricity Board aggrieved by the judgment of the learned Single Judge following Rakesh Chand's case (supra). LPA No. 108 of 2012 arises from the judgment dated 30.11.2010 in CWP (T) No. 6037 of 2008. The other writ petitions have been tagged along with the appeals since the writ petitioners have sought the same relief as the writ petitioners covered by the appeals.
2. The issue pertains to the claim made by the teachers appointed on contract basis for the minimum of the pay scale revised from time to time. The State contends that the teachers will be entitled only to the amount as entered in the contract executed by them. It is not in dispute that the amount entered in the standard form of contract executed by the ::: Downloaded on - 04/07/2022 20:02:00 :::CIS 12 teachers is the minimum of the pay scale which existed at the relevant time and the principle was to appoint the contract teachers at the minimum of the pay scale. The pay scale was .
revised by the 5th Pay Commission with retrospective effect.
The petitioners claimed the benefit of the retrospective revision in the scales. In Rakesh Chand's case, the learned Single Judge not only held that they are entitled to the scale, but went on further to hold that on the principle of equal pay for equal work, the teachers shall be entitled to the running pay scale. However, in CWP (T) No. 6037 of 2008 leading to LPA No. 108 of 2012 in HP Rajkiya Prathmik Anubandh Adhypak Sangh vs. State of HP and another, the learned Single Judge held that the teachers will be entitled to only the minimum of the pay scale, as revised from time to time. Thus aggrieved, the State has filed the appeals."
The Hon'ble Court held that the provisions in the standard form agreement clearly show that it is the basic pay in a scale that was provided and whenever the scale underwent a change, the consequential change should stand reflected and implemented in the case of the contract appointees, even if the agreements were not got executed from them every year.
Relevant part from the judgment is as under:-
"16. The provision in the standard form agreement would clearly show that it is the basic pay in a scale that was provided and whenever the scale underwent a change, the consequential change should stand reflected and implemented in the case of those contract appointees, even if the agreements were not got executed from them every ::: Downloaded on - 04/07/2022 20:02:00 :::CIS 13 year, as clarified by the Government itself in the letter dated 30.7.2003."
It was held that JBT teachers appointed on contract .
basis would be entitled to the minimum of the pay scale attached to the post of JBT teachers and revised from time to time.
5(iv). The respondent-State has not granted the minimum of revised pay scale of 2006 to the petitioners (Para Teachers) on the ground that directions issued in LPA No.105/2010 were confined to the case of JBT teachers appointed on contract basis. The stand of the respondents is fallacious. On a principle of law, it has been held that whenever the pay scale undergoes a change, the consequential change/revision should stand reflected and implemented in the case of contract appointees recruited on the minimum basic pay of the scale, irrespective of fact as to whether the agreements were got executed from them or not. That apart, in the decision rendered in Madan Lal's case (supra), the Para Teachers have already been held entitled to the revised pay scales at par with contract teachers w.e.f. 1.4.2007.
The respondent/State has implemented the said decision by granting the initial of the revised pay scale to the Para Teachers as per revision of pay scale in the year 1996. Thus, on further revision of pay scale on 1.1.2006, the minimum of the revised ::: Downloaded on - 04/07/2022 20:02:00 :::CIS 14 pay scale was liable to be released to the Para Teachers for the period i.e. 1.4.2007 to 31.03.2010. Respondents cannot take a .
dichotomous stand and discriminate the petitioners in matter of release of minimum of revised pay scale despite clear directions of the Court. While deciding LPA No.105/2010, a principle of law has been laid down that contract teachers cannot be denied the minimum of pay-scales revised from time to time. Restriction of this benefit to a particular category of contract teachers and denying the same to the other category of contract teachers (Para Teachers in the instant case), would in the facts of the case amount to violation of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. In Madan Lal's case supra, the Para Teachers have already been held entitled to pay-scales revised from time to time at par with contract teachers from 1.4.2007-31.3.2010. When contract teachers have been granted the minimum of revised pay scale of Rs.10,300-34,800/-(revised w.e.f. 1.1.2006) for the period in question, then the petitioners (Para Teachers) are certainly entitled to the same benefit.
Accordingly for the aforesaid reasons, this writ petition is allowed. The respondents are directed to release the minimum of the pay scale revised from 1.1.2006 (Rs.10300- ::: Downloaded on - 04/07/2022 20:02:00 :::CIS 15 34800) to the petitioners for the period 1.4.2007 to 31.03.2010 with appropriate grade pay of the post. This exercise shall be .
completed within a period of eight weeks from today. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall also stand disposed of.
Jyotsna Rewal Dua Judge 29th June 2022 (rohit) ::: Downloaded on - 04/07/2022 20:02:00 :::CIS