SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2011 Supreme(SC) 767

2011 AIR(SC) 2926
Supreme Court of India
R.V. RAVEENDRAN & A.K. PATNAIK
Mrs. Satimbla Sharma & Others
Versus
St. Paul's Senior Secondary School & Others
CIVIL APPEAL NO.2676 OF 2010
Decided on : 11-08-2011

Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellants :M/s. Dhruv Mehta, Sr. Advocates, Sanjay Katyal, Sriram Krishna, Kuldip Singh, Advocates.
For the Respondents:M/s. S.K. Dubey, Sr. Advocate, Niraj Sharma, Vikrant Singh Bais, Sumit Kumar Sharma, Naresh K. Sharma, Advocates.

Headnote:A) CONSTITUTION OF INDIA: Art. 39(d):- This appeal arises out of the order and judgment of the High Court of Himachal Pradesh to the effect that no writ can be issued to the Respondent school to pay salaries on the same scale as the teachers in the Government schools are entitled to, even though the Respondent school was getting grants -in- aid from State Government, because as a missionary school it cannot surrender its right as a minority educational institution. Though the court confirmed the decision of High Court, the court directed the Respondent no.3 should therefore consider making rules under Section 23 read with Section 38(2)(l) of the 2009 Act prescribing the salary and allowances of teachers keeping in mind Article 39(d) of the Constitution as early as possible.

Judgment :-

A.K. PATNAIK, J.

This is an appeal against the judgment dated 25.07.2008 of the Division Bench of the High Court of Himachal Pradesh, Shimla, in Letters Patent Appeal No.48 of 2004.

2. The facts very briefly are that in 1923 the respondent No.1-School (for short `the School') was initially established as a mission school by the respondent No.2. The School adopted the 10+2 system in 1993 and is presently affiliated to the Himachal Pradesh Board of School Education. Before independence in 1947 the School was receiving grant-in-aid from the British Indian Government and thereafter from the Government of India up to 1950. From 1951 to 1966, the School received grant-in-aid from the State Government of Punjab. After the State of Himachal Pradesh was formed, the School received grant-in-aid from the Government of Himachal Pradesh during the years 1967 to 1976. From the year 1977-1978, the School has not been receiving any grant-in-aid from the Government of Himachal Pradesh and the teachers of the School are being paid less than the teachers of Government schools and Government aided schools in the State of Himachal Pradesh.

3. Not satisfied with their salary and allowances, some of the teachers of the School filed a Writ Petition, CWP No.1038 of 1996, in the High Court of Himachal Pradesh for a direction to pay the salary and allowances at par with the teachers of Government schools and Government-aided schools and by judgment dated 11.10.2004 the learned Single Judge of the High Court of Himachal Pradesh allowed the Writ Petition and directed the respondent nos.1 and 2 to pay to the writ petitioners salary and allowances at par with their counter-parts working in the Government schools from the dates they were entitled to and at the rates admissible from time to time. Aggrieved by the judgment of the learned Single Judge, the respondent nos.1 and 2 filed Letters Patent Appeal No.48 of 2004 (for short `the LPA') before the Division Bench of the High Court and by the impugned judgment dated 25.07.2008, the Division Bench of the High Court set aside the judgment of the learned Single Judge and dismissed the Writ Petition of the appellants.

4. Learned counsel appearing for the appellants submitted that the appellants do the same work as the teachers of Government schools and Government aided schools and yet are being paid lower than the teachers of Government schools and Government aided schools. He further submitted that the Himachal Pradesh State Government Recognized Aided Schools Teachers' Association and others had filed Writ Petitions, C.W.P. No.413 of 1989 and 414 of 1989, in the Himachal Pradesh High Court for appropriate writs/directions to the State Government to pay 95% of the grant-in-aid towards approved expenditure in a school year to the privately managed recognized schools borne on the grant-in-aid list with a view to enable the managements of such schools to pay the teachers and allied staff of the schools, the same pay scales and allowances as are paid to their counter-parts working in the Government schools in the State of Himachal Pradesh and by order dated 09.09.1992, a Division Bench of Himachal Pradesh held that teachers of such private recognized aided schools are entitled to same emoluments as received by their counter-parts in the State Government and allowed the writ petitions and directed the State Government and the management of the private recognized aided schools to work out the emoluments of the teachers and pay the same to teachers of the private recognized aided schools. He further submitted that against the order dated 09.09.1992 of the Division Bench of Himachal Pradesh High Court, the State of Himachal Pradesh came up in appeal to this Court in Civil Appeal Nos. 1233 and 1234 of 1993 but this Court dismissed these two appeals on 10.05.1995. He vehemently argued that only with a view to wriggle out from the liability to pay salary and allowances to its teachers and staff at par with the













Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top