The court emphasized the importance of timely approach to the court for relief and considered the interpretation of relevant government orders in determining the eligibility for pay protection.

ORDER :

1. The order of rejection, rejecting the claim of the writ petitioner to grant pay protection as Elementary School Headmaster as granted in G.O.Ms.No.202, Educational Department dated 24.09.2008 is under challenge in the present writ petition.

2. The petitioner was appointed as Apprentice Teacher in the Panchayat Union Primary School, Kanalatti, Shoolagiri Union on 14.12.1971. He was promoted as Elementary School Headmaster on 02.10.1976 and thereafter, reverted to the post of Secondary Grade Assistant Teacher on 05.09.1978. Again the petitioner was promoted to the Elementary School Headmaster on 02.08.1995 and retired from service on 31.08.2001.

3. The grievance of the writ petitioner is that the pay protection granted to the other similarly placed Elementary School Headmaster in G.O.Ms.No.202, Educational Department dated 24.09.2008 has not been extended to him. In this regard, the petitioner made a representation and the said representation was considered by the competent authorities and they found that the Government order paves ways to fix the pay of those, who got transfer to other Union as Secondary Grade Teacher after serving as Primary School Headmaster in a Union and therefore, the petitioner was not falling under the category on par with the persons to whom the benefits were conferred under G.O.Ms.No.202, Educational Department dated 24.09.2008. In this regard, the respondents have stated as follows:

“18. It is submitted that in order to implement the above Hon’ble High Court’s order the Block Educational Officer, Shoolagiri issued orders in Rc.No.405/A1/2016 dated 05.04.2019 stating that

“as per G.O.Ms.No.202 School Education (G2) Department dated 24.09.2008, those teachers who served as primary school headmaster prior to 01.06.1988 in a Union and transferred to other Union as Secondary Grade Teachers, their services in the transferred Union should be treated as Primary School Headmaster from the date of joining as Secondary Grade Teacher. In respect of the writ petitioner-s case he joined as Secondary Grade Teacher as on 14.12.1971 in Panchayat Union Primary School, Kanalatti, Shoolagiri Union. He was given promotion as Primary School Headmaster w.e.f. From 02.08.1995 in Panchayat Union Primary School, Kodagaralapalli, in Shoolagiri Union itself, and he did not get transfer as Secondary Grade Teacher to other Unions from Shoolagiri after serving as Primary School Headmaster in Shoolagiri Union. As the writ petitioner got appointment as Secondary Grade Teacher w.e.f. 14.12.1971 in Shoolagiri Union and posted as Primary Headmaster on promotion in the same Union, there is no provision to fix his pay with reference to G.O.Ms.No.202/School Education (G2) Department dated 24.09.2008, since the above G.O. paves way to fix the pay of those who got transfer to other Union as Secondary Grade Teacher after serving as Primary School Headmaster in a Union and hence his representation is rejected”.

4. That apart, the writ petitioner was allowed to retire from service on 31.08.2001. The Government order in G.O.Ms.No.202, Educational Department dated 24.09.2008 was issued after 7 years from the date of retirement of the writ petitioner and the writ petition was filed after a lapse of 18 years from the date of retirement. Thus, even on the ground of latches, the writ petition is liable to be rejected.

5. Regarding delay and latches the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India has settled the principles as follows:

(a) In the case of Chairman/Managing Director, Uttar Pradesh Power Corporation Limited and Others Vs. Ramgopal reported in [(2020) SCC Online SC 101], the Three Judges Bench of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India held as follows:

“Whilst it is true that limitation does not strictly apply to proceedings under Articles 32 or 226 of the Constitution of India, nevertheless, such rights cannot be enforced after an unreasonable lapse of time. Consideration of unexplained delays and inordinate laches would always be relevant in writ