GOURANGA SATPATHY Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner who is a Headmaster of an aided M.E. School and who was drawing trained graduate scale while the institution was under private management before receiving grant -in -aid as he was a trained graduate, has approached this Court as subsequent to the receipt of grant -in -aid, the Government paid him only in the trained intermediate scale.

(2.) AT the outset, we must observe that though the application was filed as early as in the year 1986, and the matter was admitted on 10thi of September, 1986 in presence of the State Counsel and thereafter notice has been issued to the opposite parties, yet the State has not bothered to file a return to this Court. The petitioner's case is that a Headmaster of a Government M.E. School receives the salary in a trained graduate scale. The Government itself having passed a resolution on 21st of February, 1973, annexed as Annexure -2 to the effect that pay scales of teachers of non -Government aided schools and colleges shall be equalised with those of their counterparts in the Government institutions and the decision shall be given effect to from 1 -4 -1972, there cannot be any rhyme or reason to deny a Headmaster of an aided M.E. School which receives grant -in -aid from the Government the pay scale in a trained graduate post as his counterpart in the Government school was getting the same. The further case of the petitioner is that under Section 10(1) of the Orissa Education Act, the qualifications required for appointment of a teacher and other members of the staff of an aided educational institution and their conditions of service relation to salary, leave, pension provident fund, age of retirement, disciplinary action and other matters shall be as may be prescribed and the expression 'prescribed' means, prescribed under the Rules made for the purpose. On and from the date the Orissa Education (Recruitment and Conditions of Service of Teachers and Members of the Staff of Aided Educational Institutions) Rules, 1974 (hereinafter called the 'Recruitment Rules') came into force. Rule 7(c) thereof unequivocally indicates that the age and qualification for appointment as a teacher would be the same corresponding to the posts in educational institutions established and maintained by Government and Rule 9 of the Recruitment Rules indicates that employees of an aided educational institution shall draw the same pay, dearness allowance et cetera as are admissible to their counterparts in Government educational institutions under the relevant rules applicable to them. In that view of the matter even if at the point of time when the resolution of the Government under Annexure -2 was issued, a Headmaster of an aided M.E. School could be an untrained graduate and as such was not entitled to get the trained graduate scale but with effect from the date when the Recruitment Rules came into force, it was obligatory on the part of the Government to pay the Headmaster of non -Government M.E. School in the trained graduate scale. In the absence of any counter affidavit filed on behalf of the State, the learned Additional Government Advocate, however, urges that since prior to 1980 when the resolution of the Government under Annexure -7 was passed, the Headmaster of a non -Government M.E. School was required to be only an I.A.C.T. and, therefore, the petitioner was not entitled to claim a trained graduate scale even though he himself might have been a trained graduate. The learned Addl. Govt. Advocate, however, does not dispute the position that the Headmaster of a Government M.E. School was drawing the trained graduate scale even when the resolution of the Government under Annexure -2 was passed. In the premises, as aforesaid, whatever may be the position on the date when the resolution under Annexurc -2 was passed, we have no manner of doubt that subsequent to the Recruitment Rules coming into force, a Headmaster of a non -Government aided M.E. School would be entitled to trained graduate scale like his counterpart in the Government M.E. School provided his has the qualification of a trained graduate. The petitioner asserts that he was a trained graduate all through and even prior to receipt of grant -in -aid, the private management was giving him trained graduate scale. There is no denial to the same. In that view of the matter, accepting the second submission of Mr. Rath appearing for the petitioner, we would direct the opposite parties to give the petitioner salary in the trained graduate scale with effect from the date when the Recruitment Rules came into force. The arrear salary should be paid after adjusting there salary which the petitioner has received in the meantime in the I.A.C.T. scale and this may be done within a period of six months from the date of receipt of our order. Subsequent to 1980, there is no disiput since Annexure -7 has already been given effect to and the petitioner is receiving the salary in trained graduate scale with effect from 1980. The writ application is accordingly allowed. There will, however, be no order as to costs.