RAJ KUMAR BARMAN Vs. STATE OF ASSAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. S.P. Deka, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. J. Abedin, learned Standing Counsel, appearing for the Education Department, Assam.

(2.) All these five writ petitions involve the same questions of fact as well as law and as such, all the writ petitions are taken up together. WP(C) No.6470/2013 is preferred by 289 numbers of petitioners, WP(C) No. 6469/2013 is being preferred by another 81 numbers of petitioners, WP(C) No.312/2014 is being preferred by the General Secretary, Assam Madhyamik Sikshak Aru Karmachari Santha and othrs, WP(C) No. 5144/2013 is being preferred by the President of the Mangaldoi Madhyamik Sikshak Aru Karma-chari Santha and others and WP(C) No. 6458/2013 is being preferred by 41 numbers of petitioners.

(3.) For the sake of brevity, the sequence of facts in WP(C) No.312/2014, which has been filed by the Assam Madhyamik Sikshak Aru Karmachari Santha is being referred. It is the case of the petitioners that the Demonstrators in the Higher Secondary Schools, as per the revision pay scale under the Assam Services (Revision of Pay) Rules, 2010 are in the pay band and grade pay of Rs.8000/- to Rs.35,000/-, whereas the Graduate Teachers of the High Schools are in the pay band and grade pay of Rs. 5200/- to 20200/- It is the case of the petitioners that the two different cadres/posts, i.e. the Demonstrators in the Higher Secondary Schools and the Graduate Teachers of the High Schools are categorized in the same grade as per the relevant service rules, but the scale of pay is different. It is contended that this is discriminatory as the Graduate Teachers and Demonstrators are of equal in rank as both are engaged to teach the students. While the Graduate Teachers are doing laborious job by attending five to six classes in a day imparting education in various subjects, the Demonstrators are usually required to assist the students in the practical classes, which comprises of four to five classes in a week. It is the further case of the petitioners that both the groups are equal in rank and has been categorized as the same cadre in Class-II Jr, so there is no reason as to why one group is being given a lesser pay scale than the other group. It is contended that such factual situation of one group being paid a lesser pay scale than the other group is discriminatory and violative of the Article 14 of the Constitution of India. It is the further case of the petitioners that for the post of Graduate Teachers in a High School, the minimum qualification prescribed is a Graduate Degree in Arts, Science and Commerce, whereas, for the Demonstrators also the prescribed qualification is Graduate Degree in Science. It is the further case of the petitioners that although the two posts are categorized in the same grade, but they are provided with a different scale of pay by the Assam Services (Revision of Pay Rules) 2010 and this difference in the pay scale is discriminatory as the Graduate Teachers and the Demonstrators are equal in rank and both are engaged to teach students. It is the further case of the petitioners that the duty of the Graduate Teacher is to impart education in various subjects like English, Assamese, Social Science, General Science, Environmental Science, Mathematics etc for 4/5 periods in a given working day, whereas the Demonstrators are required only to impart education in practical teaching of science subjects. It is the submission that the volume of work of Graduate Teachers is much more than that of Demonstrator and therefore, the difference in scale of pay has degraded the status and prestige of the Graduate Teachers of the State and in the academic side they are treated to be junior than that of the Demonstrators. It is also the case of the petitioners that it has not been clearly explained in the ROP Rules of 2010 as to how the given pay band for the Graduate Teachers was fixed.