Private unaided educational institutions are not obligated to pay salaries equivalent to Government/Aided institutions as per the Act and Rules, and the employee's entitlement is governed by the terms of the contract/agreement.

ORDER :

1. The instant Special Appeal (Writ) has been filed challenging the order impugned dated 30.07.2005 passed by the learned Single Judge whereby S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 8031/2004 titled as Managing Committee, Tegor Bal Niketan Samiti & Anr. vs. Sh. P.K. Sharma & Ors., was dismissed.

2. It is submitted by learned counsel for the appellants that S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 8031/2004 was filed before the learned Single Judge challenging the order of the learned Rajasthan Non-Government Educational Institutions Tribunal (hereinafter, ‘Tribunal’) dated 19.03.2004 passed in Application No. 244/2000 whereby the learned Tribunal directed the petitioner-appellants to make payment of salary and allowances to the respondent-employee, equivalent to their counterparts serving in Government/Aided Colleges while further issuing directions to allow in favour of the respondent-employee, the benefits of the Vth Pay Commission.

3. At this juncture, learned counsel for the petitioner-appellants submitted that the petitioner-appellant is an absolutely unaided but recognized educational institution. No form of any aid is conferred upon the petitioner-appellant by the State Government. Therefore, in this background viz-a-viz the unaided and nongovernmental status of the petitioner-appellant, it was contended that the order passed by the learned Tribunal, which subsequently came to be upheld by the learned Single Judge, is contrary to the provisions of Section 29 of the Rajasthan Non-Government Educational Institutions Act, 1989 (hereinafter, Act of 1989) and Rule 34 of the Rules framed under the Act of 1989. Furthermore, it was submitted that the Education Department issued Order No.60 dated 29.07.1998 wherein it was categorically stated that teachers and other employees serving in unaided educational institutions would be free to enter into an agreement to pay/receive the emoluments on a mutual basis, till the government frames any rules in connection therewith.

4. In support of the submissions made herein-above, learned counsel relied upon the judgments rendered in Satimbla Sharma & Ors. vs. St. Paul’s Senior Secondary School & Ors.: (2011) 13 SCC 760, Adarsh Vidhya Mandir Samiti, Bharatpur & Anr. vs. Raju Lal & Ors.: 2014(2) RLW 1753 (Raj.) and Rekha Devani & Anr. vs. State of Raj. & Ors.: 2015 WLC (Raj.) UC 710. While concluding, learned counsel argued that courts cannot issue a mandamus to a private unaided institution to pay to its employees, salary and allowances, equal to the salary and allowances payable to similarly situated employees in Government/Aided Institutes, as such private unaided institutions do not fall under the domain of public law.

5. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent-employee has submitted that orders passed by the learned Tribunal as well as the learned Single Judge, are in consonance with the settled position of the law as well as the statutory provisions applicable in connection therewith. To elucidate upon the said submission, learned counsel contended that while passing the order impugned dated 30.07.2005, the learned Single Judge duly took into consideration the judgement of the Hon’ble Apex Court as rendered in K. Krishnamacharyulu & Ors. vs. Sri Venkateshwara Hindu College of Engineering & Anr. reported in AIR 1998 (SC) 295 along with the relevant statutory provisions and the bi-partite agreement entered between the contesting parties dated 25.03.1996 and thereafter, ordered for the payment of salary to the respondent-employee at par/equivalent to that of the lecturers in Government/Aided Colleges for the period subsisting between 25.03.1996 to 07.03.2000, in line with the Vth Pay Commission.

6. Whilst praying for the dismissal of the present appeal, learned counsel for the respondent-employee placed reliance upon the dictum of this Court as rendered in S.B. Special Appeal (Writ) No. 46/2002 titled as Yashpal Sharma vs. RNGEIT and Ors. which was subsequently upheld by the Division Bench in D.