P. TULSI DAS AND ORS. versus GOVERNMENT OF A.P. AND ORS.

Citation: [2002] SUPP. 3 S.C.R. 306 · Decided: 24-10-2002 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: DORAISWAMY RAJU, H.K. SEMA · Disposal: Case Partly allowed

Judgment (excerpt)

A 
P. TULSI DAS AND ORS. 
v. 
GOVERNMENT OF A.P. AND ORS. 
OCTOBER 24, 2002 
B 
[DORAISWAMY RAJU AND H.K. SEMA, JJ.] 
Service Law: 
C 
Andhra Pradesh Educational Service Untrained Teachers (Regulation 
of Services and Fixation of Pay) Act, 1991 (Act No. 14 of 1991); Sections 2 
and 3-Retrospective Operation-Depriving the benefits already accrued and 
acquired by certain categories of teachers-Constitutional validity of-Held, 
Orders passed by the Government to meet exigencies and in public interest 
provides sufficient legal basis for acquisition of rights/benefits accrued by 
D teachers-Legislature could not have validly denied these rights 
retrospectively-However, it could haw prospective operation-Constitution 
of India-Articles 14, 16, 162 and 309-Andhra Pradesh Educational Rules, 
1966. 
Automatic advancement Scheme-Scope and ambit of-An incumbent 
E before ascertaining a claim for the benefits under the Scheme will have to 
strictly comply with the conditions stipulated therefor in the Scheme-Such 
benefits cannot be claimed by virtue of service rendered on a post pursuant 
to the concession in appointment to that post. 
F 
Andhra Pradesh Educational Rules, 1966 were framed by the State 
Government. Under these rules, Schools were classified into different 
categories along with pay scale to trained Teachers (SGBT Teachers). 
However, in Telangana area pay scales of trained Teachers were lower, 
but scale' of pay for Graduate B.Ed. School Assistant was on the higher 
side. Subsequently, there was upward revision in the pay scales of both 
G SGBT Teachers and School Assistants. In the meanwhile, due to non-
availability of trained Graduate Teachers in Science and Mathematics, 
State Government passed orders whereby untrained Graduate Teachers 
could be appointed in the scale of pay of trained Graduate Teachers for a 
period of 2 years. However, untrained Graduate teachers in Humanities 
H were continuously paid in the lower scale of pay, and they filed writ 
306 
·-
P. TULSI DAS v. GOVT. OF A.P. 
307 
petitions before the High Court which granted them scale of pay at par A 
with untrained graduate teachers in Science and Mathematics. The 
decision of High Court was not challenged by the State Government. 
Thereafter, SGBT Teachers and School Assistants teaching in Humanities 
in other Schools also filed writ petition for grant of same scale of pay, the 
petition was transferred to Administrative Tribunal constituted in the B 
State; the Tribunal allowed the Petition. 
State G?vernments created supernumerary posts of teachers to 
comply with the directions/orders issued by Tribunal/High Courts. Due 
to such financial commitment, State Government became heavily burdened 
and promulgated the Andhra Pradesh Educational Service Untrained C 
Teachers (Regulation of Service and Fixation of Pay) Ordinance, 1991. It 
was replaced by the Act and was made effective retrospectively. The Act 
purports to withdraw benefits already accrued and acquired by untrained 
graduate teachers. Sections 2 and 3 of the Act were unsuccessfully 
challenged by the aggrieved teachers before the State Administrative 
Tribunal. Hence these appeals. 
D 
It was contended for the appellants that provisions of the enactment 
which was brought into force with retrospective effect took away their 
vested rights, suffers the vice of hostile discrimination, a·rbitrariness and 
expropriation of vested rights, and liable to be struck down as violative 
of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India. 
E 
On behalf of the State, it was submitted that the Act purported to 
deny and discontinue ill-gotton rights and benefits which was undeservably 
obtained by the teachers. 
Partly allowing the appeals, the Court 
HELD: I. I. It is well settled that in the absence of Rules under Article 
309 of the Constitution in respect of a particular area, aspect or subject, 
F 
it was permissible for the State to make provisions in exercise of its 
executive powers under Article 162 which is co-extensive with its G 
Legislative powers laying conditions of service and rights accrued to or 
acquired by a citizen would be as much rights acquired under law and 
protected to that extent. The orders passed by the Government, from time 
to time and at any rate upto the passing of the Andhra Pradesh 
Educational Services Untrained Teachers (Regulation of Service and 
Fixation of Pay) Act, to meet the administrative exigencies and cater to H 
308 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS (20

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.