Teachers granted time bound promotion prior to 1.4.1989 entitled to revised pay scale of Rs.1400-2600 w.e.f. that date under 1989 resolution, subject to service record verification and refixation of pay and retiral benefits.

JUDGMENT :

DEEPAK ROSHAN, J.

1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. The instant writ application has been preferred by the petitioners for allowing equitable relief in the matter of revision of salary in terms of the Resolution of the then Finance Dept., Govt. of Bihar as contained in Memo No. 6022 dated 18.12.1989 as per which the petitioners had been entitled for pay scale of Rs. 1400-2600 w.e.f. 1.4.1989.

3. The petitioners, who have been appointed on different dates between 1976 to 1977 to the post of Assistant Teacher in different schools within the District of West Singhbhum have claimed that they should be given the pay scale of Rs. 1400- 2600 meant for Assistant teacher’s senior scale w.e.f. 1.4.1989.

4. The petitioners have pleaded and brought on record the Resolution dated 18.12.1989, and have relied upon Clause 13.3 of the said resolution, which reads as under:-

“13(iii). Those teachers who have received promotion into Junior Selection Grade or first time bound promotion after 1st 1989 shall be given the benefit of promotion for the purpose of fixation of their pay in the Revised scale only with effect from the date they have received promotion, or date on which they complete 12 years of service, whichever is later.”

5. The Ld. Counsel for the petitioners had also argued that the issue in relation to grant of revised pay scale of Rs. 1400- 2600 to the Assistant Teachers, who had been granted promotion or had completed 12 years, is no more res integra in view of the order passed by the Coordinate Bench of this Court in the case of Ajit Kumar Mahto Vrs. State of Jharkhand as reported in 2008 (3) JLJR 282. The said order passed by this Court dated 11.7.2008 has been assailed by the State and affirmed in L.P.A. No. 136/2009 and S.L.P.(C) No. 21695/2010.

6. The petitioners have also relied upon the order passed in L.P.A. No. 202/2017, wherein the Division Bench of this Court while considering the issue having been settled by the Hon’ble Apex Court and while taking into account the State Litigation Policy, have criticized the action of the State in preferring appeal.

7. The petitioners have also relied upon the letter dated 8.9.2019 issued by the Director, Primary Education, wherein direction has been issued to the District Superintendent of Education, East Singhbhum to extend the benefits to similarly situated persons.

8. A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the respondent District Superintendent of Education, wherein it has been primarily contended that the teachers who have been granted 1st time bound promotion/senior scale on completion of 10 years of service in Matric Trained Scale are only entitled for the benefits of revision of pay scale in terms of Resolution No. 6032 dated 18.12.1989.

9. Ld. Counsel for the State have contended that since the present petitioners have not been allowed the time bound promotion/senior selection grade promotion similar to the Ajit Kumar Mahto, hence, their case is not at par with the case of Ajit Kumar Mahto.

10. A Rejoinder to the counter affidavit has been filed, wherein at para-9 it has been stated that the Petitioner No. 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 15 and 16 have been allowed the time bound promotion/senior scale prior to 1.4.1989 and hence, they are entitled for the benefits of pay revision in terms of the resolution dated 18.12.1989.

11. The instant case was heard on 13.2.2025 and the following order has been passed:-

“07/13.02.2025

Vide para-9 to the rejoinder, the petitioners have submitted that 10 out of 17 petitioners who possess the requisite qu