B.S. BHANDARI Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioners are working as Sports Coaches in respondent No.3 - Kurukshetra University. Through present writ petition, they have challenged the decision of Director General Higher Education Department, Haryana, dated July 27, 2011 (annexure P -21) holding that the petitioners are not entitled to UGC pay scales w.e.f. January 1, 2006 in view of para 8 (P) (iii) and (iv) of Ministry of Human Resources and Development (MHRD) letter No. 1 -32/2006/U -II/U -I dated December 31, 2008 (annexure P -22). The petitioners have sought a direction to the respondents to grant the benefit of revised UGC pay scales w.e.f. January 1, 2006 as per 6th Pay Commission with all consequential benefits including interest on the delayed payments. The petitioners claim that the revised pay scales have been granted to other University teachers.

(2.) THE case of the petitioners, as per the pleadings is that the Governor of Haryana was pleased to accord sanction to declare the posts of Sports Officers, Assistant Sports Officers and Sports Coaches in Kurukshetra University, Kurukshetra, equivalent to the posts of Director of Physical Education in Government/ private affiliated Colleges w.e.f. April 1, 1980 vide letter dated June 11, 1986 annexure P -1. The Sports Officers, Assistant Sports Officers and Sports Coaches working in the grade of Rs.700 -1300, Rs.700 -1100 and Rs.550 -900 respectively were held entitled to the UGC grades of Rs.700 -1600/ - w.e.f. April 1, 1980. The Sports Coaches were granted UGC grade of Rs.700 -1600 in view of the letter annexure P -1. They were granted the grade of Rs.2200 -4000 w.e.f. June 1, 1986. A perusal of letter annexure P -2 indicates that while granting UGC grade to Sports Coaches, the arrears from 1986 to 1990 were not paid but the same was credited to CPF account of various coaches. Though the Sports Coaches were granted pay scale of Rs.2200 -4000 but there was no mention with regard to the senior scale and selection grade. The Registrar of the respondent University wrote a letter to respondent No.1 State, annexure P -3 dated May 5, 1993 desiring on behalf of Vice Chancellor that the Sports Coaches may be considered favourably for the grant of senior scale of Rs.3000 -5000/ - and Selection Grade of Rs.3700 -5000/ - on the pattern of Directors of Physical Education, which have now been re - designated as Lecturers in Physical Education. On the recommendation of the Screening Committee approved by Executive Council, vide resolution Nos. 26 and 28 , dated January 10, 1997, the Sports Coaches including the petitioners were allowed Senior Scale/ Selection Grade subject to the condition that they will participate into Refresher Courses/ Summer Institutes. It is further pleaded that a letter was issued from the office of respondent No.1 to the Registrars of the respondent University and M.D.U., Rohtak with regard to the grant of revised pay scales w.e.f. January 1, 1996 and corresponding replacement of pay scales to the employees of various Universities in the State of Haryana. In the said letter, it was provided that Coaches shall be given revised pay scale w.e.f. January 1, 1996. Vide letter annexure P -4 -A, dated December 8, 2003, the State Government agreed to grant revised pay scales to the petitioners w.e.f. January 1, 1996 by observed as follows: -

(3.) THE petitioners claimed that vide Resolution No.35 dated 28.7.1999, it was decided by the University that Sports Coaches will not be treated as teaching staff and they would not be granted the benefit of revised pay scales as admissible to Lecturers in Physical Education. The said issue was challenged in CWP No. 3353 of 2001. The writ petition was allowed quashing the resolution of the Executive Council with a direction to the respondent University to consider the case of the petitioners for grant of relief within a period of six months vide judgment dated July 28, 2002, annexure P -6 passed by a Division Bench of this Court. A direction was issued to grant revised pay scales, as prayed for. The above said judgment of this Court was challenged by the respondent University by filing an SLP in the Supreme Court which was dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to the respondent University to file review petition vide order annexure P -7 dated July 8, 2003. The contempt petition bearing COCP No. 76 of 2003 ­M.M. Bhardwaj and others Vs. Sh.Dhanpat Singh, Higher Education Commissioner, was filed for not complying with the orders of the Division Bench. The Government granted revised pay scales to the petitioners working on sports posts and arrears in the revised grades were ordered to be released vide letter passed by respondent No.2 dated December 17, 2003, annexure P -8. After compliance of the orders passed by Division Bench holding Sports Coaches as Teachers, in this context a resolution no.36 dated December 30, 2003 was passed to the effect that the Sports Coaches would be treated as Teachers in accordance with the orders of the High Court in CWP no. 3353 of 2001. Copy of the resolution has been appended with the writ petition as annexure P -9. The relevant portion of resolution No.36 dated December 30, 2003 reads as follows: -