The court directed the State to formulate a regularization scheme for Post Graduate Teachers under Samagra Shiksha Abhiyan, emphasizing the need for consultation with the Central Government.

JUDGMENT :

ARINDAM LODH, J.

By means of filing the present writ petition, the petitioners have prayed for following reliefs:

“i. Issue Rule upon the Respondents to show cause as to why writ in the nature of mandamus and/or Order/direction shall not be issued whereby directing the Respondents to regularize the service of the Petitioners with all consequent service benefits.

ii. Issue Rule upon the Respondents to show cause as to why Writ in the nature of mandamus and/or Order/direction shall not be issued whereby directing the Respondents to grant regular pay scale pertaining to the posts of Post Graduate Teacher w.e.f. the date when the Petitioners have completed 5 years of service.

iii. Issue Rule upon the Respondents to show cause as to why Writ in the nature of mandamus and/or Order/direction shall not be issued whereby directing the Respondents to give the benefit flowing from the common judgment, dated 23.02.2021, passed in WP(C) No.329/2015 in Sajal Deb Versus State of Tripura & others & WP(C) No.212/2016, passed by the Hon’ble High Court in Monoj Debbarma Versus State of Tripura & others.

iv. Make the rules absolute,

v. Call for records,

vi. Pass any further order/orders as this Hon’ble High Court considered fit and proper.”

2. Brief facts, as necessary for determining the issues raised in this writ petition are that the petitioners being the Post Graduate Teachers were serving under the Rashtriya Madhyamik Shiksha Abhiyan (for short, RMSA ranging from the year 2011/2012 and presently they have been serving under Samagra Shiksha Abhiyan as like as Post Graduate Teachers of the State Government. The object of the Scheme was to enhance enrolment in Classes IX and X by providing of a secondary school within a reasonable distance of every habitation, to ensure access for universal enrolment of the young students. It has been asserted in the writ petition the Additional Secretary to the Govt. of Tripura, Department of School Education, vide Notification dated, 23.04.2018 [Annexure-1 to the writ petition] notified that, in accordance with the decision of the Govt. of India, an integrated Scheme for School Education in Tripura i.e. Samagra Shiksha Abhiyan, has been launched extending from Pre-School to Class-XII from the financial year 2018-19 under a single State Implementing Society of Samagra Shiksha Abhiyan, Tripura, with administrative control of the State Project Director, by subsuming/merging the existing centrally sponsored schemes of Sarba Shiksha Abhiyan, [SSA], Rashtriya Madhyamik Shiksha Abhiyan, [RMSA and Teacher Education [TE].

2.1 It has further been asserted in the writ petition that the petitioners having requisite qualification were selected and subsequently appointed as Post Graduate Teachers under RMSA. Initially their appointment was for 1(one) year and subsequently, the tenure has been renewed from time to time.

2.2 It is contended that, the petitioners were appointed against the duly created sanctioned posts. According to the petitioners, though they have been appointed under erstwhile RMSA and presently working under Samagra Shiksha Abhiyan, Tripura. It is, therefore, urged that so far qualification is concerned there is absolutely no difference between the petitioners and their counterparts in the Education Department who are in regular capacity as Post Graduate Teachers. In support of their contention, they have mentioned and relied upon a common judgment and order dated 18.12.2020 of this Court passed by learned Single Judge (the then Chief Justice, Mr. Akil Kureshi, J.) in WP(C) No. 89 of 2020 [Snehangshu Das & Ors. Vs. The State of Tripura & Ors.] along with other writ petitions whereby the learned Single Judge had allowed the writ petitions with a direction to extend the regular pay scale to the petitioners after completion of their continuous 5 years of service on fixed pay basis. Similarly, the petitioners further mentioned and relied upon another common judgment and order dated 23.02.2021, passed by a Div