GOVINDBHAI V PADALIA Vs. COMM OF HIGHER EDUCATION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By way of this petition, the petitioner has challenged the order passed by the District Assistant Examiner, Local Audit Fund Office, Rajkot dated 12.01.1994 whereby the petitioner is deprived of his salary for the higher secondary grade.

(2.) The facts in brief giving rise to this petition deserve to be set out as under :- The petitioner Govindbhai V. Padalia came to be appointed as Assistant Teacher at Shri. V.M. Chelani Govt. School, Bhanvad of Jamnagar District vide appointment letter dated 27.09.1996 and joined Secondary Section with effect from 06.10.1976 and he was given appointment in the pay scale of Rs.440-750. The petitioner came to be placed as P.T. Teacher in the Higher Secondary Section of the said school with effect from 01.08.1977. The petitioner was also carrying on the duties of taking classes in the physics subject and continued to be higher secondary teacher till 09.08.1979. For administrative reasons, the petitioner was subsequently transferred to various schools from 09.08.1979 to 06.08.1988. Vide order dated 08.09.1978, the Principal, Bai Saheba Girl's High School, Rajkot had granted special allowance which was being paid to the Higher Secondary Teacher. Even after the petitioner's appointment in the higher secondary section, the appointment of the petitioner was not approved by the department and hence, the petitioner made a representation on 01.10.1991 to the Director of Higher Education requesting to extend the benefit of the Government Policy reflected in the Government Resolution dated 08.12.1989. After representation being made, the appointment of the petitioner came to be approved vide order dated 17.12.1991 by District Education Officer, Rajkot in the Higher Secondary Section subject to approval by Audit authorities. After the introduction of 10+2+3 pattern of Education, new pay scale was prescribed for Higher Secondary Teachers but the Government by way of stop gap arrangement was giving Rs.75/= per month towards the allowance for working in higher secondary section. In the year 1981, the Government granted selection grade to the secondary teachers who had put in more than about 15 years service and therefore, anomaly was created to the effect that secondary teacher with a selection grade was getting Rs.550-900 whereas the higher secondary teacher was placed in the pay scale of Rs.440-750. Vide resolution dated 08.12.1989, the Government fixed the pay scale of the higher secondary teachers at Rs.550-900 with effect from 01.07.1979, it was also resolved that the higher secondary teachers irrespective of their date of working in the higher secondary section should be placed in the pay scale of Rs.550-900 with effect from 01.07.1979 and upto 31.12.1985, their pay should be fixed notionally and on and from 01.01.1986, they should be placed in the pay scale of Rs.1640-2900. Pursuant to this resolution, pay of the petitioner was fixed as per the Government Resolution. The petitioner's case is that he is qualified and eligible to be appointed as Higher Secondary physics teacher as well as Higher Secondary P.T. Teacher. Therefore as per the circular dated 24.04.1990 issued by the Director of Education, the petitioner is even qualified to be absorbed as P.T. Teacher in the Higher Secondary Section. Even then, the District Assistant Examiner of Local Fund Office, Rajkot vide order dated 12.01.1994 directed the petitioner's school, i.e. Bai Saheba Girls' High School, Rajkot that the petitioner is not entitled for the aforesaid pay scale and from the aforesaid date for reason that he was being paid the allowance prior to the fixation of pay in the pay-scale of Rs.550-900 and revised as Rs.1640-2900, since he was paid the allowance, his services cannot be deemed to be regularised in the higher secondary section. Consequently, the petitioner's school on 02.02.1994, passed an order reducing the basic pay of the petitioner from Rs.2540/= to Rs.2100/- from 01.03.1994 in the pay scale of Rs.1640-2900. Hence the petitioner has preferred the present petition.

(3.) Learned Counsel for the respondent has submitted that in view of the mistake committed by the officer of the respondent, the petitioner was given a lower pay-scale saying that this is a case of wrong application of pay-scale and which error on being brought to the notice by the Local Fund, Rajkot is now sought to be corrected. This is a case of fixation of pay-scale from one pay-scale which was wrongly given to the petitioner into the pay-scale which the petitioner deserves not from 01.07.1979, but from 16.08.1988. Under the circumstances, on re-fixation of pay, the basic pay of the petitioner is bound to be reduced. In the premise, counsel for the respondent submitted that since it was pointed out by the office that the scale is wrongly fixed, it was re-fixed by the office.