Untrained teachers are entitled to salary increments and benefits upon completion of training despite delays caused by external circumstances, emphasizing equal treatment under educational regulations.

JUDGMENT :

RAI CHATTOPADHYAY, J.

1. Since prayers in all the writ petitions as mentioned above are similar in nature, those have been heard analogously and are being disposed of by dint of the instant common judgment as follows:-

2. The pay fixation statement of the writ petitioners dated May 06, 2019 has been objected to by the Assistant Director, Dte. of A/Cs (SE), Hooghly commenting thereupon as below:-

“Objection: It appears from the SV & other relevant documents that the pay fixed at 14340/- on 1.7.2006 needs to be reviewed & pay of the incumbent needs to be recast in the light of GO. No. 759 SE (S) dated 30.07.2009 read with 30 SE (B) dated 10.02.2010, 118 SE (S) dated 06.02.2018 & 806 SE (S) dated 08.07.2007.

Overdrawn in pay is to be calculated & recovered as per rule & challan to be annexed.”

3. Hence, being aggrieved the petitioners have filed the instant writ petitions. They have prayed for the relief inter alia that, such comment of objection dated December 27, 2019 be set aside and the petitioners be granted incremental benefit along with benefit of 18 years of continuous service; refixation of pay and salary by giving effect to the incremental benefit and not deducting the same; and setting aside of the order of refund of the alleged overdrawn amount dated October 25, 2019 and December 04, 2019 respectively (in two different writ petitions), due to non-completion of B.Ed. within five years of appointment.

4. The factual background of the writ petitions as above are also similar. The petitioners have been appointed as the untrained Assistant Teachers of the respective schools in the year 2001. In accordance with the Rules, the petitioners had to complete their training and qualify in B.Ed. within five years of entering into service that is, in case of the present petitioners, within 2005. Admittedly, the petitioners could not complete their training qualification within the said stipulated period of time. According to the petitioners, the root cause for the same has been beyond their control and also that the time period for completion of training qualification of each Assistant Teacher has been twice extended by the respondent Authority. According to the writ petitioners, they have completed their training qualification within such extended period of time. Therefore, neither they could have been deprived of the benefit of increment payable to them on the fifth year of their service, nor of the benefit allowable to them after completion of 18 years of their continuous service. Hence, they have filed the instant writ petitions for appropriate relief.

5. Mr. Nilanjan Bhattacharyya, learned senior counsel and Mr. Bikram Banerjee, learned advocate have represented the separate sets of writ petitioners as indicated in the appearance column. On behalf of the petitioners, a letter dated July 30, 2009 of the OSD and ex-officio Joint Secretary, School Education Department, Government of West Bengal addressed to the Director of School Education, West Bengal has been relied on at the outset. The said letter dated July 30, 2009 is regarding the subject matter “Grant of benefit of increment to the untrained Assistant Teachers not undergone completed B.Ed. Training yet.” The letter informs that, as per existing Rules/provisions, four increments are allowed to the Assistant Teachers during their first five years of service. Within the first five years of service, they have to complete the B.Ed. course approved by NCTE. The letter has further informed that, as during the said pe