HARYANA STATE ADHYAPAK SANGH Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this application, the applicants are seeking implementation of the directions given by this Court in judgment dated July 28, 1988 in Civil Appeals Nos. 2366-67 of 1988 and Writ Petns. Nos. 91-92 and 551-561 of 1986. The appellants and the petitioners in these cases were teachers employed in various Government aided private schools in the State of Haryana who had approached this Court with the claim that teachers employed in Government aided private schools are entitled to parity with the teachers employed in Government schools in the matter of pay scales and other emoluments, such as, Dearness Allowance, House Rent Allowance, City Compensatory Allowance, Medical Reimbursement and Gratuity, etc.

(2.) In judgment dated July 28, 1988 this Court, while considering the said claim, has taken note that prior to 1967 there was considerable disparity in emoluments of teachers employed in the same State and the Kothari Commission was appointed by the Government of India to examine the conditions of service of teachers with the object of improving the standards of education in the country, and that, among other things, the Kothari Commission recommended that the scales of pay of school teachers belonging to the same category but working under different managements, such as, Government, local bodies or private organisations, should be the same. This Court has also observed that almost all the States, including the State of Haryana, decided to implement the recommendations of the Kothari Commission and that the State of Haryana declared in January, 1968 that the revised rates suggested by the Kothari Commission would be made effective from December 1, 1967 and that the grades of teachers of privately managed schools would be revised on the pattern of the grades of teachers working in Government schools and as the deficit between the original grades and the'revised grades was found too burdensome for the managements of the aided schools to bear, the State decided to meet the increased expenditure entirely in regard to pay and dearness allowance. It was also observed by this Court that the State Government of Haryana followed the principle of parity between the teachers working in Government schools and aided schools until 1979 and that in 1979, the pay scale of teachers in Government schools was revised by the State after the report of the Pay Commission, but in the case of the teachers of aided schools, the revision was effected two years later and as a result the salary and other emoluments paid to the teachers of aided schools had fallen far behind the emoluments paid to the teachers in Government schools. In the said judgment of this Court, it is stated that there was general agreement between the parties that there is no reason for discrimination between the teachers employed in the aided schools and those employed in Government schools so far as the salaries and additional dearness allowance are concerned and that the State Government was not accepting the claim to parity in respect of other heads of allowance put forward by the petitioners in these matters before this Court. This, Court also took note of the readiness expressed by the State Government to reimburse the payment of ten instalments of the additional dearness allowance but not the twenty five additional dearness allowance instalments released after April 1, 1981 and that the grant-in-aid given by the State Government to these aided schools covers the deficit to the, extent of seventy five per cent of the approved expenditure and that the approved expenditure extends to the salaries paid to the teaching and non-teching staff, which includes the pay and dearness allowance and interim relief before April 1, 1981 and the pay and additional dearness allowance beyond April 1, 1981 but does not include house rent allowance, city compensatory allowance, medical allowance and the other heads claimed by the petitioners in these matters. In the light of the aforesaid considerations this Court has held as under:

(3.) The applicants, in this petition (who were amongst the appellants in Civil Appeal No. 2366 of 1988) have submitted that the respondents have failed to implement the aforesaid directions given by this Court inasmuch as they have not revised the pay scales of the teachers and non-teaching staff employed in Government aided private schools with effect from April 1, 1979 and again with effect from January 1, 1986 and have also not paid the instalments of the additional dearness allowance, as per the directions given by this Court. It has also been submitted by the applicants that no scheme has so far been framed by the respondents with regard to payment of other allowances, such as, house rent allowance, city compensatory allowance, medical reimbursement and retiral benefits claimed by the applicants in the aforesaid appeal. Notice was issued. to the respondents on this petition and in response to the said notice counter-affidavits have been filed wherein it has been claimed that the respondents have fully implemented the directions given by this Court in its judgment dated July 28, 1988.