LexBAIJ NATH AND ORS. versus THE STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANR.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
) ( BAIJ NATH AND ORS. v. THE STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANR. MARCH 19, 1996 [G.N. RAY AND B.L. HANSARIA, JJ.] Se1Vice Law : Entitlement to higher payscale---Held, teacliers/maste1~ in the High Schools of Punjab entitled, 011 acquisition of post-graduate degree, to a higher pay scale, meant for lecture1~, in tenns of the govemment letter dated 23 July 1957. A B c The appellants approached the High Court seeking a direction to the respondents to pay them the scale meant for lecturers on acquiring post- graduate qualification. Denying their prayer, the High Court held that the post of lecturer did not form part of the High School cadre. Hence, this appeal. D • Allowing the appeal, this Court Held: 1.1. The teachers in the High Schools of Punjab who acquired the post-graduate qualification became entitled to higher pay from· the date E of acquisition of the qualification as contemplated in the letter of 23rd July 1957 issued by the Government of Punjab. [541-H; 542-A] 1.2. The school cadre came to consist of lecturers also from 1969 in terms of Education Department's Notification of 9th December 1969. · [541-CJ F Chaman Lal v. State of Haryana, [1987] 2 SCR 923, relied on. State of Punjab v. Kirpal Si11gh, AIR (1976) SC 2459 = [1976] 1 SCR 529 and Gurpal Tuli v. State of Punjab, AIR (1984) SC 1901 = [1985] l SCR 882, referred to. G ~ CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No. 4544 of 19%. From the Judgment and Order dated 29.5.92 of the Punjab & Haryana High Court in C.W.P. No. 4646 of the 1992. H 539 540 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1996) 3 S.C.R. A M.K. Tiwari for Ms. Kusum Chaudhary for the Appellants. Ranbir Yadav for G.K. Bansal for the Respondents. The Judgment of the Court was delivered by B HANSARIA, J. Leave granted. 2. The appellants approached the High Court of Punjab and Haryana seeking a direction on the respondents, which were the State of Punjab and the Director of Public Instructions (Schools), to pay them according to the scale meant for Lecturers, on their acquiring post graduate qualification, • c in terms of Government letter No. 5058-FE-II-57/5600 dated 23.7.1957 read with Government letter No. 8937-5 ED-11-79/2659 dated 20.9.1979. The Division Bench of the High Court has denied the prayer. Hence this appeal under Article 136 of the Constitution. 3. The Government letter of 23.7.1957 is on the subject of revision of D scale of pay of low paid Government servants. So far as the teachers in Education Department are concerned, they have been dealt in Para 3 and • it speaks about the decision of the Government to place all teachers according to their qualifications in two broad categories : A and B. As to Category A, whose educational qualification is mainly graduation in dif- E ferent disciplines, it has been stated that they would get a scale (Rs. 110-250) with higher start for M.A. or M.Sc. This Court had occasion to lay down the purport of this letter in State of Punjab v. Ki.rpal Singh, AIR (1976) SC 2459 = (1976] 1 SCR 529. Ray, CJ., speaking for a three-Judge bench stated this did visualise a mass increase of scale of pay. The conten- tion of the State counsel that the letter only meant that a teacher who F passed graduate examination would be entitled to be appointed as Master, and on being so appointed he would be entitled to the scale of pay, was not accepted. It was stated that the teachers who possessed degrees became entitled to scales of pay according to Category A. 4. The State found it difficult, having regard to the prevailing finan- G cial position, to extend the benefit of that letter to the much wider section of teachers, and so, it issued a circular on 19 .2.1979 stating that the teachers of the Education Department would not automatically be entitled to place- 4 ment in the higher scales of pay by the mere circumstance of their improv- ing or acquiring higher qualifications in the course of their service. The teachers agitated and wanted a more generous dispensation. Thus led to H the issuance of the letter of 20.9.1979 permiting grant of l!igher scale the ,f < BAIJ NA1H v. STATE [HANSARIA, J.] 541 from date of passing of the respective higher examination. It may be A pointed out that the State of Haryana had also passed a similar order on 5.9.1979 and this Court in Chaman Lal v. State of Haryana, AIR (1987) SC 1621 = [1987] 2 SCR 923, had held that the teachers acquiring B.T. or B .Ed qualification b
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.