Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2025 Supreme(Cal) 101

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
Rai Chattopadhyay, J.
Partha Pratim De – Petitioner
Versus
The State of West Bengal & Ors. – Respondents
WPA 9347 of 2020
Decided On : 17-01-2025

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Mr. Sakti Pada Jana, Mr. Subhajyoti Das.
For the Respondent: Mr. Mrinal Kanti Ghosh

Teachers are eligible for higher pay scales upon improving qualifications if prior permission is sought, as clarified by subsequent government notifications.

Headnote:(A) Government Notification No. 548-SE(S) dated June 24, 1997; Government Notification No. 155-SE

(B) dated July 13, 1999; Government Notification No. 735-SE(S)/SP/132/2002 dated June 3, 2002; Government Notification No. 1334-SE(S) dated November 3, 2004.

(B) Eligibility for higher pay scale - A teacher must obtain prior permission before enrolling in higher studies; however, subsequent notifications allow for eligibility if permission is sought.

(C) The petitioner, an honors graduate teacher, sought higher pay after completing a Master’s Degree through correspondence, which was denied based on alleged non-compliance with prior permission requirements.

(D) The court addressed whether the petitioner complied with the notifications and if the denial of the pay scale was justified. (E) The court found that the petitioner had complied with the requirements by applying for permission and that the denial was based on erroneous legal interpretation. (F) The impugned order dated July 6, 2020, is set aside, and the petitioner is entitled to the higher pay scale effective from the date of his final examination. (G) Parties involved: Petitioner and District Inspector of Schools (SE), North 24 Parganas. (H) Dissenting opinions were not present in the judgment.

JUDGMENT :

Rai Chattopadhyay, J.

1. The petitioner has challenged the order of the District Inspector of Schools (SE), North 24 Parganas [herein after referred to as “DI”], dated July 6, 2020, in the present case. By dint of the same, the said DI/respondent No.3 has declined the petitioner’s prayer for grant of higher pay scale, pursuant to his Master’s Degree (M.A. in English) qualification.

2. The reasons shown by the respondent No.3/DI in the said impugned order, to reject the petitioner’s prayer for grant of higher pay scale is the alleged violation of the provisions of the Notification No.548-SE(S) dated June 24, 1997 [herein after referred to as “No. 548”], and also the provisions contained in the Government Notification No.155-SE(B) dated July 13, 1999 [herein after referred to as “No.155”] .

3. The respondent No. 3 has recorded in the impugned order that the petitioner has failed to comply with the provisions in the Government Notification No. 548, in as much as he has not taken any prior permission from the respondent No. 3, through the managing committee of the school, before enrolment and appearing in the examinations.

4. Secondly, it has further been stated that as per Government Notification No.155, a teacher appointed through the West Bengal School Service Commission shall be entitled to a scale of pay as per his or her qualification mentioned by the West Bengal School Service Commission. Since the present petitioner has been appointed in the category of honors graduate teacher with B.Ed., recommended by the School Service Commission, he would not therefore be entitled for grant of any pay scale other than that meant for honors graduate category of teachers.

5. For the said two reasons, the respondent No. 3/DI, by dint of the impugned order dated July 6, 2020, has turned down the petitioner’s prayer for grant of higher pay scale.

6. It appears from record that the writ petitioner was appointed in the post of Assistant Teacher in English in the respondent school with the qualification of honors graduate degree and B.Ed., as per recommendation of the West Bengal Regional School Service Commission (Southern Region). His service was approved at a subsequent date.

7. The petitioner had applied before the Secretary, Managing Committee of the school on September 30, 2002, for grant of permission to him to take admission in Master’s Degree Course in English, through correspondence course.

8. The school managing committee, in its meeting dated May 19, 2003, permitted the petitioner for pursuing the said course. However, admittedly, on May 19, 2003, the petitioner had got himself enrolled for the Master’s Degree Course, through correspondence course with Burdwan University.

9. The last of his examination was October 11, 2004, after which the petitioner has prayed for grant of higher pay scale to him, meant for post-graduate teachers, in terms of his upgrading the qualification. The said prayer of the petitioner has been rejected twice by the respondent No. 3/DI, the impugned order being the second round of rejection of the prayer of the petitioner, as above.

10. Mr. Das, learned advocate appearing for the writ petitioner has submitted that so far as the applicability of the G.O. No. 548 in case of the petitioner is concerned, the Hon’ble Division Bench of this Court in the judgment of Akhtar Hossain Chowdhury Vs. State of West Bengal, reported in 2013(2) CHN (Cal) 632 has already held that the same would not bare any relevance regarding grant of benefit to the incumbent for improving the academic qualification for correspondence course. He would say that the ratio of the said decision is applicable in the case of the present petitioner also.

11. So far as the applicability of the provisions under Government Notification No.155 in the case of the present petitioner is concerned, according to the learned advocate, the issue has been finally settled, by dint of the Hon’ble Larger Bench of this Court in the case of Utpal Kanti Karan Vs. S