GAURI SHANKER JHA Vs. SHIVASATI PRASAD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a petition for action in contempt against the eight members of the Managing Committee of Dwarkanath Multipurpose School, Muzaffarpur. The District Magistrate, Muzaffarpur, the President; and the Regional Deputy Director of Education and the Principal, Engineering College, Muzaffarpur, are among the other members of the Managing Committee.

(2.) Petitioner Gauri Shanker Jha was a Science Teacher in the school having joined on the 5th August, 1954. The school has had an Audio-Visual section. But since it had no projector of its own, it used to arrange cinema shows for students with the local cinema establishments on payment of certain amounts to them. The petitioner was put in charge of the Audio-Visual section and used to receive an extra allowance of Rs. 8/- per month, for managing the work of the Audio-Visual section. The school, however, purchased its own cinema projector machine in November, 1955, but it had no operator of its own. It was at the instance of the Secretary of the school, opposite party No. 1, Shri Shivasati Prasad, Advocate, that the petitioner began to work also as operator of the cinema projector machine from November, 1955 "on the understanding that a total sum of Rs. 130/- (which w said to be a mistake for Rs. 30/-) inclusive of the previous allowance of Rs. 8/- would be paid to him from the month of November, 1955, after due approval of the Managing Committee". The remuneration of the petitioner was, however, fixed in the beginning at Rs. 20/- per month from July, 1959, to which the petitioner did not agree and, therefore, he made a representation to the Managing Committee for increasing his remuneration. At last, the remuneration of the petitioner was fixed at Rs. 30/- per month in January, 1961. The petitioner's remuneration, according to his claim at the rate of Rs. 30/- per month from November, 1955 to December, 1960, came to Rs. 1860/-; but the petitioner was paid only Rs. 712/- which he received under protest. The Managing Committee seems to have paid the petitioner at the rate of Rs. 8/- per month from November, 1955 to June 1959, totalling Rs. 352/- and at the rate of Rs. 20/- from July, 1959 to December, 1960, totalling Rs. 360/-; the aggregate being Rs. 712/- and nothing seems to have been paid from January, 1961. According to the petitioner, he had a claim for the balance amount of Rs. 1148/- after deducting the sum of Rs. 712/-, already received by him under protest. The allegation is that when the Managing-Committee did not show any readiness to pay the balance amount due, the petitioner sent a pleader's, notice dated the 12th December, 1961, by registered post to the Secretary, opposite party No. 1, for payment of the dues within a fortnight from the date of the receipt of the notice. On receiving no reply, the petitioner on the 24th April, 1962 sent a notice under Section 80 of the Code-of Civil Procedure to the President of the Managing Committee who was the District Magistrate of Muzaffarpur. The petitioner was soon thereafter on the 24th May, 1962, put under suspension by the Secretary under a resolution of the Managing Committee, and he was asked to show cause to the charge-sheet, which is Annexure C, to the following effect:

(3.) The petitioner, in reply to the charge-sheet, submitted his explanation on the 30th May, 1962 as in Annexure D. It was said in the explanation that as he had no other channel of redress of his grievance for increased remuneration, he had no other alternative but to serve the Managing ''Committee with Pleader's notice. It also pointed out that there was nothing in the Education Code which prohibited the petitioner from taking recourse to law without approaching the department. He persisted that his claim for increased remuneration was justified.