Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

10. After having disposed of the preliminary objection raised by the learned Assistant Advocate General, we may refer to the decisions of the Apex Court and of this Court. In Chaman Lal and Ors. v. State of Haryana's case (Supra), the Supreme Court held:

"This order of the Government is now sought to be interpreted and it has been so interpreted by the High Court of Punjab and Haryana in the judgment under appeal that those teachers who had acquired the B.T. or B.Ed, qualification subsequent to December 1, 1967 (the date on which the 1968 order came into force) and before September 5, 1979 would be entitled to the higher grade but with effect from September 5, 1979 only and that those who acquired the qualification subsequent to September 5,1979 would not be entitled to the higher grade. According to the judgment of the High Court under appeal, the 1968 order did away with the principle of the 1957 order that teachers acquiring B.T. or B.Ed, qualification should get the higher grade and that a concession was shown in 1979 enabling the teachers who acquired the B.T. or B.Ed, qualification between 1968 and 1979 to get the higher scale from 1979. In our opinion this is plainly to ignore all the events that took place between 1957 and 1980. The principle that pay should be linked to qualification was accepted by the Punjab Government in 1957 and when Kirpal Singh Bhatia's case was argued in the High Court and in the Supreme Court there was not the slightest whisper that the principle had been departed from in the 1968 order. In fact the 1968 order expressly stated that the Government had accepted the Kothari Commission's report in regard to scales of pay and as already pointed out by us the main features of the Kothari Commission's report in regard to pay was the linking of pay to qualification. That was apparently the reason why no such argument was advanced in Kirpal Singh Bhatia's case. Even subsequently when several writ petitions were disposed of by the High Court of Punjab and Haryana and when the Government issued consequential orders, it was never suggested that the 1968 order was a retraction from the principle of qualification linked pay. The 1968 order must be read in the light of the 1957 order and the report of the Kothari Commission which was accepted. If so read there can be no doubt that the Government never intended to retract from the principle that teachers acquiring B.T. or B.Ed, would be entitled to the higher grade with effect from the respective dates of their acquiring that qualifications. The 1979 order was indeed superfluous. There was no need for any special sanction for the grant of Master's grade to unadjusted JBT teachers who had passed B.A., B.Ed. That was already the position which obtained both as a result of the 1957 and 1958 (1968 ? Ed) orders and the several judgments of the Court. We do not think that the Punjab and Haryana High Court was justified in departing from the rule in the judgment under appeal. The rule had been well established and consistently acted upon. Nor was it open to the Government to act upon the principle in some cases and depart from it in other cases.

(Emphasis laid)

11. In Punjab Higher Qualified Teachers Union and Ors. v. State of Punjab (Supra) the Apex Court made reference to its own decision in Chaman Lal's case as well as State of Punjab v. Kirpal Singh Bhatia's case and some of the judgments of this Court and then held :

"We must accordingly uphold the contention of the petitioners that they are entitled to higher pay on acquiring or improving their academic qualification. It is regrettable" that despite clear pronouncements made by this Court as well as the High Court in a long line of decisions starting with Kirpal Singh Bhatia's case, there is no redressal of the wrong done to JBT Teachers belonging to Category B Group II although they had acquired B.A., B.T./B.A., B.Ed, qualifications. Quite recently, in Chaman Lal and Ors. v. State of Haryana (1987) 3 SCC 113, Chinnappa Reddy, J. has considered the question in some depth. The learned Judge repelled the contention of the State Government of Haryana based on its order dated 5th September, 1979 which was sought to be interpreted to mean that the Teachers who had acquired the B.T. or B.Ed. qualification subsequent to 1st December, 1967, the date on which the 1968 order came into force and before 5th September 1979, would be entitled to the higher grade but w.e.f 5th September, 1979 only and that those who acquired the qualification subsequent to that date would not be entitled to the higher grade. According to the High Court in that case, the 1968 order did away with the principle of the 1957 order that Teachers who acquired B.T. or B.Ed, qualification should get the higher grade and that a concession was shown In 1979 enabling the Teachers who acquired the B.T. or B.Ed, qualification between 1968 and 1979 to get the higher scale from 1979".