Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

1. On October 13, 1964 the petitioner was appointed as „Workshop Instructor‟ in the Directorate of Training and Technical Education, a body established by the Govt. of NCT of Delhi and was deputed to a Polytechnic established by the Govt. of NCT of Delhi to discharge duties of a „Workshop Instructor‟. The petitioner, as the name of the post would indicate, had to be at the workshop/laboratory of the Polytechnic, where practical training was imparted to the students. The petitioner admits said fact that at the workshop/laboratory of the Polytechnic he would participate in the practical workshops undertaken by the students but would assert that pertaining to the practicals he would impart theoretical knowledge of the relevant subject.

10. In the teaching cadre, the post of Lecturer in the scale of `2200

- 4000 require Lecturers to be placed in the senior scale `3000 - 5000 upon completing 8 years service, but subject to suitability being determined. And further on rendering another 8 years service to be placed in the selection grade of `3700 -5000 but subject to suitability being determined.

11. The petitioner made representations that having joined as a Workshop Instructor on October 13, 1964 and having taught theory in workshops, having completed 16 years he should be placed in the senior scale; a representation which was premised on the assumption that as a Workshop Instructor the petitioner was required to be treated as a Lecturer when Madan Committee‟s recommendations were implemented on September 25, 1987. The requests were turned down by a non-speaking order. Petitioner filed O.A.No.544/1998 which was disposed of by the Tribunal with a direction to the Directorate of Technical Education to pass a speaking order resulting in a speaking order dated October 09, 2002 being passed rejecting the claim and as a result second round of litigation commencing when petitioner filed O.A.No.1909/2003 challenging the reasoned decision.

18. Thus, it is not a case where the post of „Workshop Instructor‟ was envisaged to be placed in the pay scale of a Lecturer. The Workshop Instructors were not engaged in teaching as conventionally understood.

19. The petitioner and his counsel kept on harping, and for which our attention was drawn to a chart showing duties of a Workshop Instructor/Foreman Instructor. The first problem with the chart is that it does not separately show the duties of a Workshop Instructor and that of a Foreman Instructor. The intermingled chart would be useless to decipher the duties of a Workshop Instructor. Further, the integrated duty chart would show that both are involved in practicals in the Workshop as also project classes in the Workshop and further, the Foreman Instructors have to take theory classes in the Workshop as also in regular class rooms. The scanty data shown to us is neither here nor there. On the subject of teaching a theory on a subject of science and on the subject of teaching by way of a practical demonstration in a Laboratory, in a decision dated November 24, 2010 deciding WP(C) 4534/2005 Gurdev Kumar v. Government of NCT of Delhi & Anr. where a „Demonstrator-cum-Technician‟ was claiming a right to be treated as a Lecturer when Madan Committee‟s recommendations were applied, the vexed issue of a practical teaching and a theory teaching was, by way of example, expounded by a Division Bench of this Court, in paragraph 24 to 26 of the opinion as under:-

20. Similar is the position in the instant case. Thus, it has to be held that there is no evidence to support the claim made by the petitioner that working as a Workshop Instructor, the predominant job performed by him was teaching theory. The claim therefore that with effect from July 13, 1988 he be treated as a Lecturer fails.

21. To summarize, the position would be that teaching cadre, commencing from the post of a Lecturer followed by a Senior Lecturer followed further by a Lecturer Selection Grade was created in the Polytechnics in the year 1988. As regards the workshops, the lowest level post was that of a Workshop Instructor, above which was the post of a Foreman Instructor, which post was in the same scale of pay as that of a Lecturer. The next above post was that of a Workshop Superintendent which was in the same scale of pay as that of a Senior Lecturer. The Foreman Instructors were to take care of lecture classes as also workshop technology and not the Workshop Instructors.