STATE OF KERALA Vs. KESAVAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The common question involved in these Writ Appeals filed against several judgments of the learned Single Judge is whether teachers without required experience for appointment as Headmasters in L.P. Schools and U.P. Schools and drawing scale of pay of teachers along with supervision allowances as stated in R.1 of Chap.XXVI of the K.E.R. are entitled to pay revision and higher grade with reference to Headmaster's pay. The question arose is in the context of implementation of pay revision order as per G.O.(P).No. 3000/98/Fin dt.25.11.1998 issued by the State Government. The above Government Order provides for grade promotions to teachers on completion of 10 years, 18 years and 23 years of service. However, we are told that on 26.6.2009 the first of the above period is reduced from 10 years to 8 years entitling teachers to get first Grade promotion on completion of 8 years continuous service. Inspite of specific provision contained in R.1, Chap.XXVI of K.E.R. disentitling teachers appointed as Headmasters without required experience before 15 years service for Headmaster's pay, the learned Single Judge held that such persons on completion of 10 years or 8 years service as the case may be will be entitled to next Grade pay based on the Headmaster's salary. It is against this finding State has filed these Writ Appeals. We have heard Government Pleader appearing for appellants and also various counsel appearing for the party respondents. The question has to be considered with reference to the relevant statutory provision viz. R.1(i) of Chap.XXVI which is extracted hereunder for easy reference:

(2.) There cannot be any doubt that the above provision makes it clear that in order to promote a teacher as Headmaster with pay of Headmaster in a Lower Primary or Upper Primary school he has to have a minimum continuous service of 10 years as teacher. However it may so happens that in several schools when the Headmaster's post falls vacant there may not be any teacher with 15 years service to be promoted to that post. Therefore in the absence of eligible person for appointment as Headmaster with the eligible scale of pay, the Rule provides for promotion of the seniormost teacher as Headmaster but with the specific rider that he will not get Headmaster's pay and allowance but will be given teachers pay that he was getting and besides it supervision allowances for holding the post of Headmaster. The question arose in all these cases is that the party respondents were appointed as Headmasters before they acquired the experience of 15 years continuous service as teacher. Therefore they were getting pay scale applicable to teachers and in addition to that only supervision allowance as contemplated in the above Rule. However when pay revision was ordered by the Government vide G.O. above referred, the respondents contended that higher grade on completion of 10 years or 8 years as the case may be should be granted with reference to the Headmaster's pay though they were not getting it. Learned Single Judge by referring to G.O. above referred on pay revision held that higher grade should be granted with reference to the post the respondents are holding, no matter they are not getting the pay of Headmasters. It is this finding that is challenged by the State as against the Rules.

(3.) We find force in the contention of the Government Pleader that entitlement for the scale of pay of Headmaster is specifically governed by R. 1 of Chap.XXVI which says that even when a teacher is promoted as Headmaster without the minimum of 15 years continuous service as teacher, he will be discharging the functions of Headmaster but will get the pay applicable to teacher and along with it supervision allowances provided under the above Rule. It may be noticed that R.45(c) of Chap.XIV A provides for appointment of Headmaster on charge basis when there is no qualified teacher. Chap.XXVI R. 1 when read along with R.45(c) of Chap.XIV A it is clear that the post held by a teacher as Headmaster without the minimum required experience of 15 years continuous service as teacher is holding the charge of Headmaster though the same may not be stated in the appointment order. We do not think there is any need to consider the question whether the appointment of the teacher without the required qualification should be as Headmaster "in charge" or "temporary" Headmaster because it makes no difference so far as pay and allowances are concerned which are clearly stated in sub-r.(1) of R.1 of Chap.XXVI. None of the respondents have a case that they are drawing the scale of pay of Headmaster when the pay revision came in to force. Therefore necessarily their next grade pay has to be granted with reference to the pay and allowances they were getting as teachers. The argument that the next higher grade has to be given under the pay revision order based on Headmaster's pay does not find any support in the pay revision order or in the K.E.R.