SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
K.N. SINGH AND M.H. KANIA, JJ.
Jaipal and others, Petitioners
Versus
State of Haryana and others, Respondents.
Writ Petn. (Civil) Nos. 455, 597, 635, 636, 777 of 1986, 1518, 1686 of 1987, 77, 78 and 395 of 1988, D/- 2-6-1988.
AND
Niaz Mohammed and others, Petitioners
Versus
State of Haryana and others, Respondents.
AND
Prem Lata and others, Petitioners
Versus
State of Haryana and others, Respondents.
AND
Hazari Lal and others, Petitioners
Versus
State of Haryana and others, Respondents.
AND
Prem Chand and others, Petitioners
Versus
State of Haryana and others, Respondents.
AND
Mohd. Qasim and others, Petitioners
Versus
State of Haryana and others, Respondents.
AND
Balwinder Kaur and others, Petitioners
Versus
State of Haryana and others, Respondents.
AND
Dharam Pal and others, Petitioners
Versus
State of Haryana and others, Respondents.
AND
Maha Singh Saini and others, Petitioners
Versus
State of Haryana and others, Respondents.
AND
Nafe Singh and others, Petitioners
Versus
State of Haryana and others, Respondents.
Advocates appeared
Mr. Govind Mukhoty, Sr. Advocate and Mrs. Rekha Pandey Advocate with him, for Petitioners; Mr. Madhusudan Rao, Sr. Advocate; Mr. Mahabir Singh, Mr. M. Satya Naryan Rao and Mr. C. V. S. Rao, Advocates with him, for Respondents.
Constitution of India – Article 32 – Petitioners in all these ten writ petitions filed have raised grievance of discrimination against the State of Haryana in not following the doctrine of "equal work equal pay – Petitioners are working as instructors under the Adult and Non-formal Education Scheme under the Education Department of Haryana – Object of the Non-formal Education and Adult Education Scheme is to impart literacy (functional and awareness) to the adult illiterates in age group of and to provide literacy to the children in the age group who are drop-outs from the primary and middle school level or who never joined any regular school – Number of Adult Education Centres have been opened in the State of Haryana, which are maintained under the Rural Functional Literacy Programme/ Project (RFLP) of the Central Government, administered by the State of Haryana although expenditure in respect of the project is borne by the Central Government –Held, Respondents plea that instructors are not transferable does not affect the doctrine of equal pay for equal work – Instructors are appointed locally to implement the Adult and Non-formal Education Scheme because they are in a better position to motivate the adults and drop-out children for participating in the scheme – An outsider may be handicapped in motivating the local residents for participating in the scheme – As far as the difference in qualification is concerned it is true that the squad teachers possess JBT certificates and many of them are graduates but minimum qualification for squad teachers is also matric – Similarly minimum qualification for instructors is matric but many of the petitioners are graduates and some of them are trained teachers possessing JBT certificates – Great emphasis was laid on behalf of the respondent State that instructors are part-time employees while squad teachers are full time employees – Similar arguments were raised on behalf of the State in the case in resisting the claim of Supervisor but the submission was rejected by this Court on the ground that having rgard to the duties and functions which the supervisors are required to perform it was difficult to uphold the plea that he was a parttime employee – Order accordingly.
Key Points: - The court holds that instructors’ duties are similar to those of squad teachers and thus equal pay for equal work applies (!) . - Instructors are entitled to the same pay scale as squad teachers, with arrears and length of service considerations from initial appointment, ignoring temporary breaks (!) , (!) . - The decision directs implementation from Sept. 1, 1985, aligning instructors’ salary with squad teachers and treating the scheme as permanent for pay purposes (!) , (!) .
Judgment
SINGH,J. :- The petitioners in all these ten writ petitions filed under Art. 32 of the Constitution of India have raised grievance of discrimination against the State of Haryana in not following the doctrine of "equal work equal pay".
2. The petitioners are working as instructors under the Adult and Non-formal Education Scheme under the Education Department of Haryana. The object of the Non-formal Education and Adult Education Scheme is to impart literacy (functional and awareness) to the adult illiterates in age group of 15-35 years and to provide literacy to the children in the age group of 5-15 years who are drop-outs from the primary and middle school level or who never joined any regular school. A number of Adult Education Centres have been opened in the State of Haryana, which are maintained under the Rural Functional Literacy Programme/ Project (RFLP) of the Central Government, administered by the State of Haryana although expenditure in respect of the project is borne by the Central Government. The petitioners were appointed instructors to impart literacy to adult illiterates at these Centres on different dates. The students who are taught by the petitioners are permitted to appear at the Vth standard (primary examinations) conducted by the Education Department of the State. On passing the examination the students are issued a certificate of having passed primary examination. On the basis of that certificate students are eligible for admission to 6th class in the regular schools maintained by the State Government. The petitioners were appointed instructors by the District Adult Education Officers of each district between 1978 to 1985 on the basis of selection held by a Selection Committee. Initially the petitioners were paid a fixed salary of Rs. 150/- per month but since April 1983 it has been increased to Rs. 200/- per month. Minimum qualifications for being appointed an instructor is matric, many of the instructors are graduates while some of them also hold junior basic training certificates. The petitioners are given a deliberate break of one day after the lapse of every six months and have thus been treated temporary in service notwithstanding the fact that they have been continuously working ever since the date of their appointment. There is another scheme known as Social Education Scheme in the State of Haryana for imparting education to illiterates in the villages, the scheme is known as State Adult Education Programme also. Under that scheme a number of social education centres have been opened. The teachers employed under that scheme were known as squad teachers who run the centres. In 1981 the head squad teachers and squad teachers were regularised as head teachers and teachers, and granted the benefit of pay scale applicable to regular head-masters and teachers of primary schools maintained by the State Government. The petitioners grievance is that although they are performing functions and duties of the same nature as performed by the squad teachers but they are,. denied the same scale of pay; instead, they are being paid a fixed salary of Rs. 200/- per month. The relief claimed by the petitioners in all these petitions is identical in the following terms:
a) Issue a writ in the nature of mandamus or any appropriate writ, order or direction that the petitioners continue to be in the service of the respondents from the date of their initial appointment irrespective of their being a deliberate break in their services during the vacation period.
b) Issue an appropriate writ, order or direction to the respondents to put the petitioners on regular pay scales to that of primary school teachers in the Education Department of Haryana plus other consequential benefits from the date of their initial appointment and further direct the respondents to pay the petitioners the difference in arrears of salary accrued to them from the date of their initial appointment.
c) Issue an appropriate writ, order or direction t
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.