IN THE HIGH COURT OF MEGHALAYA
T. Nandakumar Singh, J.
Shri. Debaprasad Saha, United Mukdangra Secondary School And Others - Appellant
Versus
The State Of Meghalaya, The Director Of School Education And Literacy, Govt. Of Meghalaya, The Additional Director Of School Education And Literacy And The Inspector Of Schools - Respondent
WP (C) No. 258 of 2011
Decided on : 22-04-2014
Science Teachers - Pay Disparity - Meghalaya School Education Act, 1981, Section 5(2)(a); Equal Remuneration Act, 1976 - The court discussed the disparity in pay scale between Science teachers of Ad hoc Aided schools and Govt. schools, and directed the Govt. to consider granting financial aid at least to the extent of basic pay of Govt. school Science teachers to the Ad hoc Aided school teachers.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners, Science teachers in Ad hoc Aided schools, sought parity in pay scale with Govt. school Science teachers, citing similar duties and qualifications. The Govt. reduced their pay scale, leading to the petition.
Finding of the Court:
The court directed the Govt. to consider granting financial aid to Ad hoc Aided school teachers at least to the extent of basic pay of Govt. school Science teachers, emphasizing the principle of equal pay for equal work.
Issues: Disparity in pay scale between Science teachers of Ad hoc Aided schools and Govt. schools, and the obligation of the State Govt. to provide equal remuneration for equal work.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the principle of equal pay for equal work and directed the Govt. to consider granting financial aid to Ad hoc Aided school teachers at least to the extent of basic pay of Govt. school Science teachers.
Final Decision: The court disposed of the petition by directing the Govt. to take a policy decision considering the grievances and the principle of equal pay for equal work, and to grant financial aid to Ad hoc Aided school teachers at least to the extent of basic pay of Govt. school Science teachers.
JUDGMENT :
T. Nandakumar Singh, J.
1. In this writ petition filed by the 22 (twenty two) Science teachers of the Ad hoc Aided Schools praying for a direction to the respondents to grant the revised pay scale of Rs. 14,100-27,510/- pm with all allowances etc. to the petitioners at par with that of the Assistant teachers of deficit system schools w.e.f. 01.01.2007.
2. The concise fact leading to the filing of the present writ petition is recapitulated.
The petitioners were initially appointed as Science teachers in the different Ad hoc Aided schools in the Garo Hills in the State of Meghalaya. The names of their respective Ad hoc Aided schools and date of joining are shown against their names in the tabulation hereunder:-
3. It is the further case of the petitioners that the petitioners are working as Science teachers in the Ad hoc Aided High Schools affiliated by the Govt. of Meghalaya and these Ad hoc Aided High schools have been getting Grant-in-Aid. Initially, the petitioners who were appointed during 1989-1990, were paid basic pay of Rs. 525/- pm plus DA plus annual increment from the relevant date of their joining as admissible under the rules by the Govt. of Meghalaya, which was at par with that of the Assistant teachers of deficit system schools of Meghalaya. The pay components of the petitioners up to 29.02.1992 are consists of Basic + DA + Annual Increment. After 1991, on the recommendation of Meghalaya Pay Commission, their basic pay was enhanced to Rs. 1700/- pm plus DA as admissible w.e.f. 01.03.1992 with annual increment @ Rs. 50/-and this type of pay structure was continued up to 28.02.2001 and subsequently, the annual increment had been stopped w.e.f. 2000. Pursuant to the recommendations of the Meghalaya Pay Commission, the basic pay of the petitioners were raised to Rs. 5100/-pm plus DA as admissible w.e.f. 01.03.2001 but no increment thereafter and that pay structure was continued up to February, 2006. But suddenly, w.e.f. 01.01.2011, the pay scale of the petitioners was reduced to fix pay of Rs. 9000/- pm only.
4. It is the further case of the petitioners in the writ petition that since the petitioners are also performing the same functions and duties of Science teacher of the Govt. schools/deficit system schools, they are also entitled to enjoy their pay scale at parity with the pay scale of the Science teachers of the Govt. schools/deficit system schools. Mr. M Chanda, learned counsel for the petitioner strenuously contended that the educational qualifications of the present writ petitioners are equivalent with the educational qualifications of the Science teachers of the Govt. schools/deficit system schools. The Govt. of Meghalaya, Directorate of School Education & Literacy issued an order dated 23.02.2011, that in the budget for 2010-2011 for enhancement of renewal grant to Science teacher in 123 (one hundred twenty three) Ad hoc Aided Secondary Schools of West Garo Hills at a lump sum of Rs. 9000/- pm per teacher per school w.e.f. 01.01.2011 for a period of two months w.e.f. 01.01.2011 to 28.02.2011 as per list enclosed therein had been granted. For easy reference, the said order dated 23.02.2011 (Annexure-VI to the writ petition) is quoted hereunder:-
Directorate of School Education & Literacy,
Government of Meghalaya, Shillong.
Subject:-Enhancement of Renewal of fund for maintenance recurring grant-in-aid to Science teachers in existing Adhoc-Aided/Permitted Secondary Schools during 2010-2011.
ORDER
Ref:-Letter No. EDN 228/2006/103 dated 23rd Feb 2011.
Sanction to an expenditure of Rs. 22,32,000/- (Rupees Twenty two lakhs thirty two thousand) only is hereby accorded and fund placed at the disposal of the Inspector of Schools, West Garo Hills, Tura under the Head of Account "2202-General Education 02 Secondary Education 110-Assistance to Non-Govt. Secondary Schools (09) Improvement facilities for reaching of Science in High Schools 31 grant-in-aid Plan General.
In the budget for 2010-2011 for enhancement of renewal
K. Krishnamacharyulu and Others Vs. Sri Venkateswara Hindu College of Engineering and Another
The Chandigarh Administration and Others Vs. Mrs. Rajni Vali and Others
AI
The main legal point established in the judgment is the binding effect of the settlement between the parties, the waiver of the right to seek re-employment by the workmen, and the entitlement of the ....
A lockout is justified if it is declared in response to an illegal strike or a strike that is in breach of a settlement or award.
The combination of eyewitness testimonies, recovery of the weapon used, and forensic examination results can establish guilt in criminal cases, even based on circumstantial evidence.
The conviction of an accused person under Section 27(3) of the Arms Act is not permissible in law if the accused is also charged with committing murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
The court can enhance compensation based on the deceased's income and family dependency, and adjust the multiplier used by the Tribunal if found unjustified.
A valid signature must be in the candidate's own handwriting, as emphasized by the General Clauses Act and relevant case law.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.