JAGPAL SINGH Vs. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners, who were untrained matriculates, were appointed against the posts of J. T. teachers on a fixed salary of Rs. 40 per month in 1967 and 1968 respectively. While in such employment, the petitioners improved their educational qualification inasmuch as the first petitioner passed the B. Ed. examination on July 8, 1972 and the second petitioner passed the same examination on December 2, 1972. In the year 1973, both the petitioners were directed to undergo the I. B. T. training at Kullu. In view of their having acquired the improved qualification, as aforesaid, they made a representation to the Department not to compel them to undergo the J. B. T. training. The Department accepted their representations and accorded "exemption" taking into consideration the fact that the petitioners having acquired the qualification of B. Ed,, it was not necessary for them to undergo the J. B. T. training. The petitioners were thereafter allowed to continue against the J. B. T. posts in the usual pay scales admissible to the J. B. T. teachers on the extant terms and conditions.

(2.) Be it stated that the directions abovementioned were issued in a communication dated August 25, 197 3, addressed by the Director of Education, Himachal Pradesh, to the District Education Officer, Sirmaur. A copy of the communication was endorsed to the Secretary (Education) to the State Government. The learned Advocate General has placed on record a copy of the said communication, the material portion of which reads as follows : - "Sub : Junior Basic Training for untrained teachers at Kulu. Since Shri Jagpal Singh Petitioner No. 1), who was originally appointed as an untrained Matriculate in 1968, has improved his qualification and now holds the qualification of B. Ed., it is not necessary for him to undergo J.B.T. training. He may, however, be allowed to continue against J.B.T. post in the usual pay scale admissible to J, B. T. teachers on the present terms and condition. For the post of Trained Graduate, he will have to compete for it, alongwith others, as and when the posts are advertised by the Commission, but no hope of selection can be held out to him by this office. Shri Jagpal Singh will, therefore, have to apply to the Commission for the post of Trained Graduate when the posts of Trained Graduates are advertised by the Commission next as it will not be possible to allow him to continue against a J. B. T. post for an indefinite period. This may be brought home to Shri Jagpal Singh." It is not in dispute that an indentical communication was issued in the case of Sagar Kumar (Petitioner No. 2).

(3.) If appears that the State Government granted higher scales of pay to the various categories of teachers on the basis of their acquiring higher academic qualifications while in service. Such higher pay -scale was allowed to the trained J. B. T. teachers also. However, the petitioners were denied the benefit of the higher pay -scale on the ground that they were not qualified when initially appointed and that they had not undergone the J. B. T. training The petitioners had thereupon instituted Civil Writ Petition No. 633 of 1985, on which an order was passed on October 1, 1985. directing that the petition be treated as a representation made to the competent authority and that the same be decided by a reasoned order to be made within the specified time -limit. The representation accordingly made was decided on May 8, 1986. The representation was rejected for the following reasons : - "In this connection it is pointed out that both of you were appointed as untrained Matriculate and were selected to under got J.B.T. Training at Kullu during the sessions 1973 -75 but later an exemption to undergo J. B. T. training was granted on your request with the condition that since you have improved your qualifications and hold the qualification of B. Ed. and as such, it is not necessary for you to undergo J. B. T. training. You were, however, allowed to continue against J. B. T. posts in the usual pay scale admissible to J B.T. teachers on the present terms and conditions. It was made clear to you that for the post of T G.I. you will have to compete for it alongwith others and when posts are advertised by the Commission but no hope of selection can be held out to you from this office. From the above it is clear that you cannot be absorbed as T. G. T. against the 25% quota reserved for junior categories of teachers after improving their qualification. Secondly, you will not get higher pay scale of T.G.T automatically by virtue of office memo No. Fin (C) B (7) 44/77, dated 27 -9 -79. In the circumstances, the letter of the Finance Department cannot be read in isolation to give impetus to allow higher scale of pay to you on account of having improved the qualification But the letter of Finance Department has to be read together with the letter of exemption."