UNION OF INDIA Vs. MADAN LAL GAUTAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) All these writ petitions raise common question of law. Physical Education Teachers( PETs for short) employed in various schools under Delhi Administration (now Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi) are claiming parity in pay scales. They want to be at par with the NDS instructors (NDSTs). Different OAs filed by them before the Central Administrative Tribunal have met with conflicting results. First OA being OA No.1526/90 was filed by Mr.Madan Lal Gautam & Ors. which was decided by the learned Tribunal vide its judgment and order dated 31st August, 1994 holding that those applicants were entitled to the parity in the pay scales and denial thereof amounted to violation of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. After this decision, various developments took place in the said OA itself resulting into filing of numerous miscellaneous applications as well as series of contempt petitions. These developments would be noted at the appropriate stage. However, what is required to be noted at this stage is that orders Contempt Petition arising out of judgment dated 31st August, 1994 the Union of India are the subject matter of CWP No.2390/98.

(2.) In the meantime, number of other OAs, namely, 1159/95, 1638/98, 213/98, 718/98 and also 169/2001 also came to be filed by similarly situated applicants as the applicants in OA No.1526/90. In fact in these OAs, the applicants prayed that the same benefit as given to applicants vide Judgment dated 31st August, 1994 in OA No.1526/90 be extended to them also. OA No.1159/95 alongwith other OAs 1290/95 & 849/91 were taken up together and were disposed of by Judgment dated 2nd May, 1996. The time the learned Tribunal refused to give any relief to the applicants in the aforesaid OAs and after noticing that 5th Pay Commission was already seized with the matter, the only direction given was that the applicants may submit representation which shall be forwarded by the respondents to the 5th Pay Commission for their consideration as expeditiously as possible. As no such benefit was extended even after 5th Pay Commission, another spate of OAs came to be filed claiming this par.ity once again. This batch of OAs with lead OA No.1638/98 came up for hearing and was disposed of by Judgment dated 26th October, 1999. By this time as noted above, the 5th Pay Commission had also given its report on the basis ' of which the Government had issued necessary orders for revising the pay scales of different categories of employees including the applicants in these OAs. Taking note of the recommendations of the 4th and 5th Pay Commissions as well as various judgments of the Supreme Court, the learned Tribunal vide its Judgment dated 26th October, 1999 in these OAs , dismissed the said OAs. This trend continued even thereafter dismissing the subsequent applications by various orders passed in other OAs. It is for this reason that apart from CWP No.2390/98 which is filed by the Union of India, petitioners in all other writ petitions are the applicants who had filed various OAs.

(3.) For this reason, all these writ petitions were heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment.