Deciding Authority : Supreme Court
Date of Judgement : 12/01/2000
Bench : S.R.Babu, D.P.Mohapatro
Facts : Dev Samaj Girls Senior Secondary School,Chandigarh is a private educational institution duly recognized and receiving grant-in-aid from the Union Territory of Chandigarh Administration since 1-12-1967. Initially the school was imparting education upto class 10. In the year 1988, it was decided to start 10+1 and 10+2 classes in the school and upgrade it to senior secondary level. The
Director of Public Instructions, Union Territory, Chandigarh granted permission to the management for starting 11th and 12th classes in Humanities and Commerce,with a condition that no grant-in-aid will be provided for any additional staff. The classes were started on the recommendation of the Director of Public Instructions,the institution was granted affiliation by the Board of Secondary Education, New Delhi, with effect from 1-5-1998. The corresponding classes in Dev Samaj Degree College, Chandigarh, were closed on the decision of the Chandigarh Administration that education in such classes would be given in schools. The respondents 1 to 12 are lecturers who are teaching different subjects teaching in 11th and 12th classes of the school. When their request for grant of salary at par with their counter parts working in privately managed recognised aided schools in Chandigarh was not heeded to by the Chandigarh Administration, they filed a writ petition in the High Court of Punjab and Haryana seeking inter alia a writ of mandamus directing the respondents i.e. the Chandigarh Administration,its Finance Secretary, its Director of Public Instructions (School) and the Managing Committee of the School, to pay the same salary and dearness allowance to the petitioners which is being paid to their counter parts working in private recognised aided schools in Chandigarh, especially when the other members of the staff/teachers teaching upto 10th class are receiving the scales sanction for the posts against which they are working. The respondents also prayed that the expenses so incurred should be apportioned by the Chandigarh Administration and the Management of the institution in the ratio of 95% and 5% as is being done between the State Government and Management of the institution Aided Schools. The claim of the respondents was refuted by the appellants mainly on the ground that permission to open the 11th and 12th classes in the school was subject to the condition that no grant-in-aid will be provided for additional staff and therefore the claim of the respondents for parity of salary with their counter parts in other aided institutions cannot be accepted.
The High Court,on consideration of the case of the parties and the contentions raised on their behalf allowed the writ petition and directed the respondents who are appellants herein to pay the same salary to the petitioners/respondents 1 to 13 herein, which is being paid to their counter parts in the privately managed government aided schools in Chandigarh and the expenses so incurred be apportioned by the Chandigarh Administration and the Management in the ratio of 95% and 5% respectively.
Judgement : The position has to be accepted as well-settled that imparting primary and secondary education to students is the bounden duty of the State Administration. It is a Constitutional mandate that the State shall ensure proper education to the students on whom the future of the society depends. In line with this principle,the State has enacted Statutes and framed Rules and Regulations to control/regulate establishment and running of private schools at different levels.The State Government provides grant-in-aid to private schools with a view to ensure smooth running of the institution and to ensure that the standard of teaching does not suffer on account of paucity of funds. It needs no emphasis that appointment of qualified and efficient teachers is a sine qua non for maintaining high standard of teaching in any educational institution.
Keeping in mind these and other relevant factors this Court in a number of cases has intervened for setting right any discriminatory treatment meted out to teaching and non-teaching staff of a particular institution or a class of institutions. The Hon’ble Court relied on a number of decisions such as Haryana State Adhyapak Sangh & ors. Vs. State of Haryana & Ors. (AIR 1990 SC 968) , State of Maharashtra Vs. Mannubhai Pragati Vashi & Ors. JT 1995 (6), SC 119) and State of Haryana & Anr. Vs. Ram Chander & Anr. (1997 (5) SCC 253) and went on to say that “The position is manifest that there is no justification for denying the claim of the respondents for parity of pay scale and to accept the contention of the appellants will amount to confirming the discriminatory treatment against the respondents”.
Held : Appeal Dismissed
By Tejasv Anand , IV th Year , AMITY LAW SCHOOL,DELHI.
A COMPREHENSIVE WEBSITE FOR ALL LEGAL DEVELOPMENTS