Government is vested with discretion to provide grant or other financial assistance

Common Judgment: V. Ramasubramanian, J.

All these writ appeals are filed by the teaching/non-teaching staff of recognized private schools, which were sanctioned grant-in-aid with effect from 1.6.1991/1.6.1994.

2. In short, the grievance of the appellants is that after the sanction of grant-in aid to their schools and the sanction of the posts held by them, the services rendered by them prior to the date of sanction of grant-in aid and the sanction of the posts, were directed to be counted only for the purpose of promotion. But following a Government Order in G.O.Ms.No.18, Education, Science and Technology (T2) Department, dated 9.1.1997, passed in favour of one individual by name M.Jayaraj, the appellants were also granted the benefit of counting the past services for the purpose of pay fixation and pension. However, by a later order in G.O.Ms.No.314, School Education (T2) Department, dated 12.11.1999, the said benefit of counting the past services, for the purpose of pay fixation and pension, was withdrawn, leading to consequential orders of downward revision of pay and recovery.

3. The batch of writ petitions filed by the appellants as well as others, challenging the aforesaid G.O.Ms.No.314, School Education (T2) Department, dated 12.11.1999 and the consequential orders of refixation of pay and recovery, were dismissed by the learned Judge, however with a direction to give an opportunity to the individuals, for the purpose of quantifying the amount to be recovered from each of them. The said order of the learned Judge has led to the above appeals.

4. We have heard Mr. AR.L. Sundaresan, learned senior counsel and Mr. M. Kamalanathan, learned counsel appearing for the appellants in the above appeals and Mr. A. Arumugham, learned Additional Government Pleader for the official respondents.

5. Leading the attack on the order under appeal, Mr. AR.L. Sundaresan, learned senior counsel contended –

a) that a benefit conferred upon the appellants by virtue of a Government Order in G.O.Ms.No.18, Education, Science and Technology (D2) Department, dated 9.1.1997, cannot be taken away by another order passed in the year 1999, without affording an opportunity to the appellants, as the orders passed in 1999, visited the appellants with civil consequences;

b) that the benefit of counting the past services rendered by the appellants, prior to the sanction of grant-in aid and the sanction of the posts, for the purpose of pay fixation and pension, was conferred upon the appellants, by virtue of a conscious decision taken by the Government and not as a result of any mistake on the part of the officials or any misrepresentation on the part of the appellants and that therefore the benefit cannot be withdrawn as a matter of routine, in the usual course, as a vested right had been conferred upon the appellants;

c) that the impugned Government Order G.O.Ms.No.314, School Education (D2) Department, dated 12.11.1999, was passed on the basis of another order in G.O.Ms.No.439, Education (D.1) Department, dated 5.5.1993, which had no relevance to the issue on hand and hence the impugned order was vitiated for non application of mind;

d) that it is a constitutional mandate for the State to ensure imparting of Primary and Secondary Education and that therefore it is the duty of the State to sanction grant-in aid to institutions which are recognized by the Government; and

e) that it is the duty of the State to maintain parity of pay between teaching and non-teaching staff of aided/unaided schools and government schools and that the benefit granted to the appellants for counting their past services for the purpose of pay fixation and pension, was in tune with the principle of equal pay for equal work.

6. In reply, Mr. A. Arumugham, the learned Additional Government Pleader took us through the various Government Orders issued prior to the order under which the benefit was extended to the appellants. He also took us through various provisions of the Tamil N