The single judge bench of the Tripura High Court held that whether a class of people performs similar and identical duties is not the matter to be decided by the Court. However, it is equally settled that the employees should not be subjected to exploitation if they perform any such duties which are similar and identical to the persons performing the same duties.
Brief facts
The factual matrix of the case is that the advertisement was issued by the Respondent inviting applications from Indian Nationals permanently residing in Tripura for filling up the posts of Instructor of Painting, Instructor in Applied Art, Instructor in Sculpture, Instructor in Environment & Indian Heritage, Instructor in Graphics (Print Making) and Instructor in Ceramics & Pottery and both the petitioners had applied for the posts of Instructor in Painting and Instructor in Environment & Indian Heritage respectively. The Petitioners were appointed and selected for the said post. Furthermore, after the appointment they cleared National Eligibility Test (NET). The plea of the petitioners is that they were appointed as Instructors, but, they have been discharging their duties of teaching the students of the Colleges of the State, which are performed by Assistant Professors as per UGC guidelines, but, they are deprived of their legitimate pay scale prescribed for Assistant Professors under the UGC guidelines. Therefore, the present writ is filed.
Contentions of the Petitioner
The Petitioner contended that if the Petitioners are performing duties of Assistant Professors, they are entitled to be treated as Assistant Professor.
Contentions of the Respondent
The Respondent contended that the posts advertised were meant for filling up the posts of Instructors and not for Assistant Professors, they applied for the posts of Instructors, and on being selected they were appointed to the post of Instructors in the respective streams.
Observations of the court
The Hon’ble Court observed that 15 years has been passed and they didn’t raise any grievance about the mode of their selection in the posts of Instructors. The petitioners are simply estopped and have acquired their right to ventilate their grievance regarding their appointments in the respective streams of Instructors.
The court furthermore observed that the fact that the State cannot be forced to abide by the UGC regulations is likewise well-established. The State Government may apply different provisions specified in the rules for the appointment of teachers in the Colleges, according to the UGC guidelines, which makes this explicit.
The court noted that whether a class of people performs similar and identical duties is not the matter to be decided by the Court. The Courts have no such expertise to examine or evaluate such complex matters. To decide whether a person or persons perform(s) duties similarly situated to others, it is absolutely within the domain of the authority concerned. However, it is equally settled that the employees should not be subjected to exploitation if they really perform any such duties which are similar and identical to the persons performing the same duties.
Based on these considerations, the court directed the State-respondents to consider the claim of the petitioners for granting them the pay scale prescribed for Assistant Professors after examining their duties and responsibilities they perform/discharge.
The decision of the court
With the above direction, the court disposed of the Writ Petition.
Case Title: Sri Biplab Das V. The State of Tripura
Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Arindam Lodh
Case No.: WP(C) 1046 OF 2022
Advocates for the Petitioner: Mr. Arijit Bhaumik, Advocate. Mr. S. Dey, Advocate.
Advocate for the Respondent: Mr. Mangal Debbarma, Addl. G.A.
Read Judgment @Latestlaws.com
Picture Source :
