MAHANAND SINGH Vs. STATE OF UTTARPRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioners 1 to 9 are petitioners have invoked the jurisdiction of teachers while petitioners 10 to 14 are this Court under Art. 226 of the Constitution peons employed in the Kisan Higher Secondary for the issue of a writ of mandamus directing School, Saipatipur District, Allahabad. These the State of Uttar Pradesh, Director of Education and the District Inspector of Schools, Allahabad, and also the manager of the institution to make payment of their salary according to the provisions of the Uttar Pradesh High Schools and Intermediate Colleges (Payment of Salaries of Teachers and other Employees) Act, 24 of 1971, and also to quash the order of the State Government, dated 8 October 1976, cancelling its earlier order sanctioning grant-in-aid to the institution.

(2.) In 1966 the institution concerned was a junior high school. It was receiving grant-in- aid from the State Government. In 1972, the institution was raised to the higher secondary standard and was given recognition by the Board of High School and Intermediate Education in accordance with the provisions of Intermediate Education Act, 1921. But no grant-in-aid was sanctioned by the State Government in respect of the high school classes. It appears that there was some complaint against the institution as a result of which grant-in-aid for the junior high school classes was suspended under the order of the State Government, dated 13 November 1975. On a recommendation made by the Director of Education, the State Government by its order, dated 29 November 1975, sanctioned the grant-in-aid to the said institution in respect of the high school classes. Later on, it was discovered that the order of the State Government was passed in ignorance of the fact that the institution's grant-in-aid in respect of the junior high school had been suspended. The State Government has taken a policy decision in its order, dated 10 December 1969, that no institution whose grant-in- aid for junior high school was suspended shall be entitled to grant-in-aid for high secondary school. It appears that the Director of Education was unaware of the order of the State Government, dated 13 November 1575, when he made recommendation for the sanction of the grant-in-aid for the higher secondary school. When this mistake was detected the Director of Education wrote a letter to the Government pointing out the error. The State Government by its order, dated 8 October 1976, cancelled its earlier order, dated 13 November 1975, sanctioning grant-in-aid to the institution in respect of high school classes. The order of the State Government has been challenged not by the committee of management but by the employees who are not being paid their salary.

(3.) The petitioners who are in the employment of the institution contend that they are not being paid their salary even though they have been working in this institution. They have further asserted that in view of the provisions of the Uttar Pradesh High Schools and Intermediate Colleges (Payment of Salaries of Teachers and other Employees) Act, 1971 (hereinafter referred to as the 1971 Act), the liability of payment of salary to the petitioners is on the State Government and since it has not been paid to them since along, the State Government has failed to act in accordance with S. 3 of the 1971 Act, hence, they are entitled to a mandamus. On behalf of the State Government and the District Inspector of Schools counter-affidavits have been filed and it has been asserted that since the institution is not receiving maintenance grant from the State Government in respect of high school classes the 1971 Act is not applicable and the State Government is not liable under S. 3 of the said Act to pay salary to the petitioners. The respondents have further contended that no teacher of an institution employed for the purpose of teaching students up to junior high school classes is entitled to salary under the 1971 Act and the State has no liability to pay salary to such teachers.