JAIPAL NIAZ MOHAMMED PREM LATA HAZARI LAL Vs. STATUE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners in all these ten writ petitions filed under Art. 32 of the Constitution of India have raised grievance of discrimination against the State of Haryana in not following the doctrine of "equal work equal pay".

(2.) The petitioners are working as instructors under the Adult and Non-formal Education Scheme under the Education Department of Haryana. The object of the Non-formal Education and Adult Education Scheme is to impart literacy (functional and awareness) to the adult illiterates in age group of 15-35 years and to provide literacy to the children in the age group of 5-15 years who are drop-outs from the primary and middle school level or who never joined any regular school. A number of Adult Education Centres have been opened in the State of Haryana, which are maintained under the Rural Functional Literacy Programme/ Project (RFLP) of the Central Government, administered by the State of Haryana although expenditure in respect of the project is borne by the Central Government. The petitioners were appointed instructors to impart literacy to adult illiterates at these Centres on different dates. The students who are taught by the petitioners are permitted to appear at the Vth standard (primary examinations) conducted by the Education Department of the State. On passing the examination the students are issued a certificate of having passed primary examination. On the basis of that certificate students are eligible for admission to 6th class in the regular schools maintained by the State Government. The petitioners were appointed instructors by the District Adult Education Officers of each district between 1978 to 1985 on the basis of selection held by a Selection Committee. Initially the petitioners were paid a fixed salary of Rs. 150/- per month but since April 1983 it has been increased to Rs. 200/- per month. Minimum qualifications for being appointed an instructor is matric, many of the instructors are graduates while some of them also hold junior basic training certificates. The petitioners are given a deliberate break of one day after the lapse of every six months and have thus been treated temporary in service notwithstanding the fact that they have been continuously working ever since the date of their appointment. There is another scheme known as Social Education Scheme in the State of Haryana for imparting education to illiterates in the villages, the scheme is known as State Adult Education Programme also. Under that scheme a number of social education centres have been opened. The teachers employed under that scheme were known as squad teachers who run the centres. In 1981 the head squad teachers and squad teachers were regularised as head teachers and teachers, and granted the benefit of pay scale applicable to regular head-masters and teachers of primary schools maintained by the State Government. The petitioners' grievance is that although they are performing functions and duties of the same nature as performed by the squad teachers but they are,. denied the same scale of pay; instead, they are being paid a fixed salary of Rs. 200/- per month. The relief claimed by the petitioners in all these petitions is identical in the following terms:

(3.) There is no dispute that the State of Haryana has framed its own scheme for imparting education to Adult illiterates in the villages, this scheme is known as the State Social Education Scheme. Under this scheme the State of Haryana has opened social education centres in various Districts. These centres have been functioning under the Department of Education where teachers known as squad teachers have been imparting literacy, functional and awareness among the illiterates. The State of Haryana. by its order dated 20-1-1981 regularised the services of the squad teachers working on ad hoc basis with effect from 1-1-1980 and sanctioned them pay scale of Rs. 420-700, the scale applicable to primary school teachers in the State of Haryana. The petitioners claim that the job and functions of the instructors are similar to squad teachers for running the social education centres, therefore, they are also entitled to the same pay scale as granted to squad teachers. At this stage it is necessary to note that supervisors are appointed to supervise the various centres at which instructors have been working under the Adult Education and Non-formal Education Scheme. A number of supervisors filed a writ petition in this court under Article 32 of the Constitution claiming same scale of pay as granted to head squad teachers of the Social Education Scheme. Their claim was upheld by this Court in Bhagwan Dass v. State of Haryana (1987) 4 SCC 634 and direction was issued sanctioning the same scale of pay to them as has been sanctioned to the head squad teachers of the Social Education Scheme. The petitioners' claim that as the supervisors who supervise their work have been granted pay scale applicable to head squad teachers the petitioners are also entitled to the pay scale applicable to squad teachers of the Social Education Scheme.