IMPORTANT POINT
Headmasters of upgraded schools are entitled to additional increments under ROPA Rules-2009, irrespective of the date of upgradation, as long as they assume higher responsibilities.

JUDGMENT :

(Rai Chattopadhyay, J.) :

1. The writ petitioners are the Headmasters of different schools in the District of Birbhum. They are aggrieved that inspite of their being Headmasters of the respective schools, the benefit of re-fixation of pay under ROPA Rules-2009, has not been granted in their favour, by allowing additional increment @ 3% along with additional grade pay, reckonable to upgradation of the schools as Higher Secondary Schools, with effect from the respective dates of upgradation of schools by the concerned respondent authority. The memorandum dated 22.03.2017, issued by the Joint Secretary, School Education Department, Government of West Bengal/respondent no. 2, is impugned in this writ petition, which was issued with reference to an earlier memorandum dated 06.05.2016. The writ petitioners have prayed that the impugned memorandum be not acted upon any further set aside and by dint of an order of this Court. The other prayer of the writ petitioners is for direction of the Court to allow them the benefit of increment @ 3% of the existing Basic Pay, in addition to the Grade Pay or additional Grade Pay as admissible, as per ROPA Rules-2009.

2. The fact of the present writ in brief is that the writ petitioners are Headmasters of different schools in District Birbhum, which have been upgraded to Higher Secondary School as per the policy decision of the respective respondent authority. Thus, as the Head of Administration and Headmasters of the schools the writ petitioners claim that they have entrusted with higher responsibility than earlier. On the occasion of the “ROPA Rules 2009” having come into force, the petitioners have claimed their benefit under the same i.e. grade pay along with 3 % increment.

3. They filed this writ petition alleging that though they being eligible to the said benefit, have been deprived on some frivolous grounds and have been subjected to discrimination as well as violation of their vital statutory as well as constitutional rights.

4. On the facts and grounds as above, the petitioners have filed the present writ petition to pray for the reliefs, as stated above.

5. Mr. Srikanta Datta, learned Advocate on behalf of the petitioners has submitted by referring to the notification thereunder dated 10.02.2010, that the benefits as applicable “Headmaster/Headmistress/Assistant to the Headmaster/ Assistant Headmistress, Higher Secondary School (VXII)”, shall be applicable to the petitioner, in this case, he being the Headmaster of the Higher Secondary School. The same would include the grade pay as well as additional increment @ 3 % . He has further stated that subsequent notification dated 22.03.2017 which is impugned in this case would not be tenable in view of its contradictory and discriminatory nature. Let the relevant portion of the notification be extracted, as herein below:-

“With reference to the above, it appears that the Deputy Director of School Education, (G.A.). West Bengal has sought clarification as to whether or not the HM of the Higher Secondary Schools upgraded after 27/02/2009 shall be allowed 3 % additional increment in addition to the additional grade pay of @ Rs.200/-.

Having considered the issue raised by the Deputy Director of School Education (G.A.), West Bengal in connection with Memo No-1003-SE(S)/5P-129/12 dated 04.12.2004, this is to clarify that ROPA 2009 and other related orders issued by this Department with the concurrence of other departments have not proposed any additional increment in favour of the Headmasters of Higher Secondary Schools upgraded after 27.02.2009. Only additional grade pay @ Rs.200/-has been allowed to the HM of the Higher Secondary Schools upgraded after 27.02.2009.

Hence, I am directed to inform that no additional increment can be allowed as per ROPA, 2009 and accordingly, Memo No-1003-SE(S)/5P-129/12 dated 04.12.2014 stands withdrawn. The Commissioner, School Education and concerned D.I. of Schools are requested to act accordingly.”

6.