LexU.P. JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL COUNCIL INSTRUCTOR WELFARE ASSOCIATION versus STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ORS.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
[2026] 2 S.C.R. 323 : 2026 INSC 117 U.P. Junior High School Council Instructor Welfare Association v. State of Uttar Pradesh & Ors. (Civil Appeal No. 758 of 2026) 04 February 2026 [Pankaj Mithal* and Prasanna B. Varale, JJ.] Issue for Consideration Whether part time contractual instructors/teachers appointed in Upper Primary School in the State of U.P. are entitled to revision of their honorarium of Rs.7,000/- per month which was fixed for a contract period of eleven months in the year 2013 or would continue to receive the same fixed honorarium for years together or for all times to come without any increment. Headnotes† Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 – Samagra Shiksha Scheme (subsumed the earlier Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan) – Constitution of India – Article 23 – Part time contractual instructors/teachers were appointed in Upper Primary School in the respondent-State under the scheme on a fixed honorarium of Rs.7,000/- per month for a contract period of eleven months in the year 2013 – They were continued even after the expiry of the aforesaid contractual period on renewed basis, year after year, but their honorarium remained fixed at Rs.7,000/- per month despite recommendations being made by appropriate authorities for its enhancement – Writ petitions filed by the instructors/teachers – Single Judge directed for the payment of Rs.17,000/- per month w.e.f March 2017 – However, Division Bench directed the State Government to pay honorarium of Rs.17,000/- per month for the year 2017- 2018 only – Interference with: Held: Appointment of the part time or contractual instructors/ teachers no longer remained contractual in nature once the contract period of eleven months for which they were initially * Author 324 [2026] 2 S.C.R. Supreme Court Reports appointed or the extended contract period stood expired – They were not even part time instructors/teachers as they were specifically prohibited for taking any job or part time employment elsewhere during their spare time – In fact, these instructors/ teachers having continued continuously for over ten years in a row are deemed to be employed permanently against deemed substantive posts, as with the passage of time and keeping in mind the continuity of the work, such posts stand automatically created – The honorarium payable to these instructors/teachers cannot remain stagnant and the same is revisable periodically at least once in three years – Any action of the State/Union Government to employ instructors/teachers on a fixed honorarium of Rs.7,000/- per month as was initially fixed in 2013-14 amounts to ‘Begar’ and unfair practice violative of Article 23 of the Constitution – Part time contractual instructors/teachers appointed in the Upper Primary School in the State of U.P. are entitled to revision of their honorarium of Rs.7,000/- per month which was initially fixed for the contract period of eleven months in the year 2013 – Said revision has to take place, if not annually then periodically as per the discretion of the Project Approval Board (PAB) – Since the PAB for the year 2017-18 had determined the said honorarium to be Rs.17,000/- per month, all instructors/teachers appointed under the scheme are entitled for the payment of the same at the rate of Rs.17,000/- per month with effect from 2017-18 till further revision takes place – State Government shall start paying honorarium to them at the rate of Rs.17,000/- per month w.e.f. 01.04.2026, arrears thereof shall be paid within six months from today – State Government may recover the contribution of the Central Government from the Union of India – Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Rules, 2010 – r.20. [Paras 70 (i)-(iii), (vii), 72] Constitution of India – Article 23 – State’s action of withdrawing a legitimately enhanced wage and then allowing honorarium to remain artificially depressed inconsistent with the spirit of Article 23: Held: The State’s actions created a condition of economic coercion that is inconsistent with the constitutional safeguards against forced labour – Its action of withdrawing a legitimately enhanced wage and then allowing honorarium to remain artificially depressed [2026] 2 S.C.R. 325 U.P. Junior High School Council Instructor Welfare Association v. State of Uttar Pradesh & Ors. would, in substance, be inconsistent with the spirit of Article 23 of the Constitution which prohibits all forms o
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.