THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE UJJAL BHUYAN
AND
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.BHASKAR REDDY
I.A.No.1 of 2022
In/And
Writ Appeal No.913 of 2019
COMMON JUDGMENT: (Per the Hon'ble the Chief Justice Ujjal Bhuyan)
Heard Ms. Vani Reddy, learned Government Pleader
for School Education appearing for the appellants, and
Mr. M. Srikanth, learned counsel for the respondents.
2. The writ appeal is directed against the order dated 23.10.2019 passed by the learned Single Judge allowing W.P.No.7769 of 2019 filed by the respondents.
3. The writ petition was filed seeking the following relief:-
"....to issue a Writ Order or Direction particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the proceedings of the fourth respondent in Rc.No.4709/A12/2019 dated 09.04.2019 instructing all the Principals of TSR Institutions in the State to terminate the services of all the PGTs/TGTs/PETs/Staff Nurse working on contract basis and guest faculty in their respective institutions on the last working day of the present academic year 2018-19 as illegal, arbitrary, discriminatory and violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India and also contrary to the submissions made by them in W.P.No.38758 of 2018 dated 31.01.2019 and set aside the same..."2
4. Respondents contended before the learned Single Judge that they were working as Teachers on contract basis from the year 2000 onwards. Appellants had been paying remuneration to the respondents for the period they had rendered service. Fourth appellant issued proceedings dated 09.04.2019 instructing Principals of all Residential Educational Institutions of Telangana to terminate the services of the Teachers and Staff of different grades working on contract basis and as guest faculty on the last working day of the academic year 2018-19.
5. The contentions of the respondents were opposed by the appellants. Appellants pointed out that respondents were working on contract basis and when there was no work, they were justified in terminating the services of the respondents.
6. Learned Single Judge on due consideration was of the opinion that proceedings dated 09.04.2019 issued by the fourth appellant were contrary to the law laid down by the Supreme Court in Ahalya Samtaney vs. State of 3 Maharashtra1. Accordingly, the same was set aside and the appellants were directed to continue the respondents in service for twelve months and to pay remuneration to them accordingly. Against the aforesaid order of the learned Single Judge, present appeal came to be filed.
7. In the proceedings held on 14.07.2021, learned counsel for the appellants submitted that she be permitted to advise appellant No.2 to consider regularising the services of the respondents working on contractual basis in different schools under appellant No.2 since the year 2003 as Trained Graduate Teachers (TETs), Post Graduate Teachers (PGTs) etc., by extending relaxation in respect of age and qualification based on the period of service rendered by them.
8. In the proceedings held on 13.07.2022, learned counsel for the appellants informed the Court that appellants have taken a decision to grant benefit of salary etc., to the respondents for the period of summer vacation as well, but prospectively from the year 2022 in terms of G.O.Rt.No.1206 dated 05.07.2022. This Court extracted 1 2018 Law Suit (SC) 780 4 G.O.Rt.No.1206 dated 05.07.2022 and passed the following order:-
"G.O.Rt.No.1206, dated 05.07.2022, reads as under:
"In the circumstances as stated by the School Education Department vide reference 5th read above, Government hereby accords permission for payment of twelve (12) months remuneration instead of ten (10) months to the Contract Resident Teachers (CRTs) working in Telangana Residential Educational Institutions Society, on par with other similar Residential Educational Institutions.
2. The School Education (Trg) Department, Telangana State, Hyderabad, shall take necessary further action in the matter, accordingly."
From the above, we find that there is no explicit mention that the remuneration to be paid to the respondents for the twelve months would be effective from the date of issue of G.O.Rt.No.1206, dated 05.07.2022.
According to learned Senior Counsel for the respondents, respondents are entitled to the said benefit from the date of order of the learned Single Judge. Order of learned Single Judge is dated 23.10.2019.
While appellants are directed to pay remuneration in terms of G.O.Rt.No.1206, dated 05.07.2022, to the respondents immediately for the current year, entitlement of the respondents for the previous years shall be decided on the next date of hearing.
List on 25.08.2022 at 2:30 pm."
9. Today, learned counsel for the respondents submits that respondents have filed I.A.No.1 of 2022.
10. In paragraph 3 of the aforesaid interlocutory application, it is stated that though the respondents are 5 entitled to salary for the years 2019, 2020 and 2021, they are willing to give up their claim to such salary, if they are paid salary for the current academic year i.e., from 24.04.2022 to 12.06.2022. It is further stated that on the above basis, writ appeal can be disposed of.
11. Learned counsel for the appellants fairly submits that appellants are agreeable to the modified contention of the respondents.
12. As a matter of fact, proceedings dated 30.07.2022 were initiated by the Secretary of the fourth appellant intimating that Government has accorded permission for payment of twelve months remuneration instead of ten months to the contractual Resident Teachers, which was communicated vide proceedings dated 13.07.2022. The differential amount of pay for the aforesaid period shall be claimed separately with the certificate of respective Principals that they had not claimed and drawn remuneration from 23.04.2022 to 12.06.2022.
13. In view of the above, I.A.No.1 of 2022 and the writ appeal are disposed of by modifying the order of the learned Single Judge dated 23.10.2019 by holding that 6 respondents would be entitled to their salary for all the twelve (12) calendar months commencing from the academic year 2022-23.
Miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. However, there shall be no order as to costs.
______________________________________ UJJAL BHUYAN, CJ ______________________________________ C.V.BHASKAR REDDY, J 25.08.2022 JSU