Non-Availability Of Promotional Post Can't Be Ground To Deny Higher Grade Arrears To Eligible Teachers: Gujarat High Court

The Gujarat High Court has held that non-availability of promotional posts cannot be a ground to deny payment of higher grade arrears to eligible school teachers. The court thus directed the State government to pay arrears of salary to primary school teachers who became eligible to higher pay scale after 9 years of service, reiterating that payment of arrears cannot be contingent on availability of Education Inspector's post in the concerned school board. Justice Nirzar S Desai noted that the present case was covered by a decision of the high court in 2024 wherein the State government was directed to pay arrears to the petitioners therein. That decision was challenged before the division bench in appeal by the State government which was dismissed and hence 2024 order had attained finality. The petitioners argued that they were similarly situated to the petitioners in 20-2-2024 order (Kalpeshkumar Punjabhai Prajati & ors. v/s State of Gujarat & Ors. and batch) and were hence entitled to similar benefits."Having regard to the overall situation, more particularly since the petitioners are stated to be identically situated to the petitioners of decision dated 20.02.2024 and since the decision of this Court has attained finality, to this Court, the issue would be squarely covered by the above referred decision...," the court thus said.It referred to various paragraphs of the 2024 order wherein the coordinate bench had rejected the State's contention that the "provision of arrears should be contingent upon the availability of the post of the Education Inspector with the concerned School Board". The order noted that the post of Education Inspector was a promotional post. In the earlier matter, the petitioners were working as Primary Teachers in various schools under the District Primary Education Committees and having completed 9 years of service, had sought for grant of benefit of higher pay-scale as per Government Resolution dated 16.8.1994.The State in the earlier matter had argued that it had come out with a Government Resolution to rectify an anomalous position, whereby Primary Teachers in certain Municipal School Boards in which there were post of Education Inspector, were entitled to higher pay-scale as per policy of the State Government vide Government Resolution dated 16.08.1994 in the pay-scale of Rs.5,000- 8,000.Whereas in other School Boards like in the case of the petitioners in Vadodara etc., the Primary Teachers were granted higher pay-scale in the pay-scale of Rs.4,500-7,000 more particularly, since there were posts of Education Inspector available. The State had thus argued that it resolves to grant the benefit of higher pay-scale to all similarly situated Primary Teachers in the pay-scale of Rs.5,000-8,000, the same would be inextricably linked to the fact of availability of the post of Education Inspector in the concerned School Board. The coordinate bench had further said:"In the considered opinion of this Court, to state that the payment of higher grade in the scale of Rs.5,000- 8,000 is inextricably linked to availability of promotional post, is completely fallacious. In the considered opinion of this Court, if there existed a promotional post of Education Inspector, which carried pay-scale of Rs.5,000- 8,000, the petitioners and all other similarly situated persons would have been automatically entitled to revision in 1st higher grade in the pay-scale as carried by the post of Education Inspector and whereas there would not have been any issue with regard to the entitlement of the petitioners and such similarly situated Primary Teachers for revision in the higher grade in the pay-scale of Rs.5,000-8,000...In the considered opinion of this Court, to state that the arrears would be granted to only such School Boards where the post of Education Inspector was in existence, would be going against the grain of the Government Resolution itself and would result in a paradoxical situation same. To clarify on one hand the Government comes out with a resolution to rectify an anomaly in the payment of 1st higher grade between Primary Teachers in School Board where the post of Education Inspector was available and where such a post was not available. Having come out with a policy now to state that payment of arrears would be dependent on availability of the promotion post of Education Inspector would amount to perpetuating the same anomaly which was sought to be rectified. The paradox being too obvious to be misused".As per the Government Resolution dated 16.08.1994, primary teachers in the pay scale of Rs. 1400–2600 were entitled to a higher pay scale of Rs. 5000–150–8000 (Grade Pay of Rs. 4200) upon completion of nine years of service. Though the petitioners, who are primary school teachers, completed 9 years of service during 2019–2020 and thereby became eligible for the first higher pay scale, the respondents did not extend the said benefit at the relevant time. The benefit was...

Non-Availability Of Promotional Post Can't Be Ground To Deny Higher Grade Arrears To Eligible Teachers: Gujarat High Court

LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK

Non-Availability Of Promotional Post Can't Be Ground To Deny Higher Grade Arrears To Eligible Teachers: Gujarat High Court

LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK

This is a premium content Available exclusively to Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers