IN THE HIGH COURT OF MEGHALAYA AT SHILLONG
W. DIENGDOH, J.
Shri. Imam Md. Abu Alam Abdulla – Appellant
Versus
State of Meghalaya & 11 Ors. – Respondent
WP(C) No. 132 of 2015
Decided on : 14-12-2023
JUDGMENT :
W. DIENGDOH, J.
1. The petitioner has approached this Court with this instant writ petition seeking clarification of the judgment and order dated 14.02.2014 passed by this Court in WP(C) No. 137 of 2010 and also for compliance of order dated 24.04.2015 passed in CONT. CAS(C) NO. 3 of 2015 arising out of WP(C) No. 137 of 2010.
2. The prayer made in this petition is for this Court to direct the respondent to release the salary of the petitioner along with DA from 01.03.2009 onwards as per Government sanction together with interest @ 12% p.a. and also to quash the letter No. HHSS/Sc-3/2015/3 dated 30.03.2015 issued by the Secretary of Hallidayganj Govt. Aided Secondary School.
3. Heard Mr. R. Debnath, learned counsel who has submitted that the petitioner was initially appointed as science teacher of Hallidayganj Govt. Aided High (now Secondary) School. The appointment order being issued by the Secretary of the said School vide order No. HHS/Apptt/Sc.Tr./94 dated 21.09.1994.
4. Reference was also made to the filing of a writ petition before this Court by the petitioner in connection with the illegal action of the respondent/Managing Committee, which petition was registered as W.P.(C) No. 168 (SH) of 2002. In that petition, the respondent 11/Headmaster herein filed a miscellaneous application before this Court being Misc. Case No. 134(SH) of 2002 and order dated 26.06.2002 was passed in their favour. However, this order was assailed before a Division Bench of this Court which after hearing the parties had passed the order dated 12.07.2002 in W.A. No 17(SH) of 2002 whereby the order dated 26.06.2002 was stayed and finally vide order dated 27.03.2003, the writ appeal was disposed of with a direction to the respondents to allow the petitioner to work as science teacher.
5. As far as the writ petition No. 168(SH) of 2002 is concerned, the same was finally disposed of on 28.03.2006 wherein by virtue of the said order the position of the petitioner was restored. This order was also challenged by the respondents before the Division Bench of this Court in W.A. No.15(SH) of 2006 but this Court vide a common judgment dated 01.05.2008 upheld the order of the learned Single Judge in W.P.(C) No 168(SH) of 2002.
6. The learned counsel has further submitted that in the light of the relevant order of this Court and the Government sanction of the science grant meant for the science teacher, it can be confirmed that he is the regular science teacher of the said school.
7. However, in spite of the fact that the petitioner is the science teacher recognized by the Government, the respondent/Managing Committee has failed to pay the salary meant for him prompting the petitioner to file a contempt case before this Court, that is, the Shillong Bench of the Gauhati High Court (as this Court then was) being C.O.P.(C) No. 9 (SH) of 2009 and this Court vide Order dated 26.06.2009 had disposed of the same on the assurance of the respondents/Contemnor that one post from Deri Linda Persara Secondary School has been transferred to the Hallidayganj Secondary School to accommodate the respondent No. 12 herein. The respondent/Managing Committee has then disbursed the salary to the respondent No. 12 from the government grant but has however, withheld the salary of the petitioner.
8. Since the respondent/Managing Committee did not release the salary of the petitioner, he was therefore compelled to file another writ petition before this Court being W.P.(C) No. 137 of 2010. This Court vide order dated 14.02.2014 has allowed the said petition and has directed the State respondent to clear the dues of both the petitioners as far as their entitlement is concerned, in accordance with rules.
9. The learned counsel has again submitted that the petitioner has filed a review petition for review of the said order dated 14.02.2014 but the same was dismissed. Thereafter, a con
The court clarified the employment status of the petitioner and directed verification of salary arrears computation, emphasizing the need for proper documentation.
The court affirmed that a teacher's continuity of service must be upheld unless substantiated by evidence; the withholding of salary without due process constitutes a violation of rights.
The court affirmed the principle that school staff must receive due salary and benefits unless proven otherwise, emphasizing continuity of service without interruption or unjust denial.
A teacher's entitlement to government pay scales requires formal appointment; informal or honorary status negates such claims.
Continuous service obligates salary payment despite appointment legality, and equal treatment demands non-discriminatory enforcement of employment rights.
Process of judicial interpretation lies in extending or applying by analogy ratio decidendi of an earlier case to a subsequent case which differs from it in certain essentials.
The Petitioner is entitled to backwages and benefits from 17.01.1998 to 04.02.2010 due to unjustified non-payment and lack of substantiated misconduct.
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.