Bombay High Court
Engg.Teachers Association Of ... vs State Of Maha..Thr Secy Hi.& ... on 23 June, 2017
Bench: Ravi K. Deshpande
wp.4176.00
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.
WRIT PETITION No. 4176/2000
* Engineering Teachers Association of
Maharashtra, A registered Society
having its registration
No. MAH/591/88/WRD/F-1054/WRD
Through its President :Shri L.P. Dhamande,
having registered office a t 79,
Laxminagar, Wardha. ..PETITIONER.
VERSUS
1) State of Maharashtra
Through its Secretary
Higher and Technical Education Department,
Mantralaya, Bombay-32.
2) Director of Technical Education
Maharashtra State Mumbai. ..RESPONDENTS .
...................................................................................................................
Ms. Komal Mundle, Advocate holding for Dr.Anjan De
Advocate for the petitioner
Mrs. Geeta Tiwari, Assistant Government Pleader for
respondent no.1
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CORAM:R.K. DESHPANDE &
MRS.SWAPNA JOSHI, JJ.
rd June, 2017
DATED : 23
ORAL JUDGMENT: (Per R.K.DESHPANDE, J.)
Challenge in this petition is to the Government Resolution
wp.4176.00
dated 4.10.2000 at Annexure "A" to the petition, to the extent it shifts
the date of implementation of pay-scales introduced by the Government
Resolution dated 18.12.1999 from 01.01.1996 to 01.08.2000, in respect
of the teachers working in unaided Engineering colleges.
2. It is urged that by Government Resolution dated 18th
th
December, 1999 the pay-scales of Teachers, Librarians and Instructors
of Physical Education in Government, non-Government non-aided
Engineering colleges and other degree-level technical institutions are
made applicable with effect from 01.01.1996. By a subsequent
Government Resolution dated 04.10.2000 the date of implementation of
the revised scale in respect of teachers working in non-Government
unaided Engineering colleges is shifted from 1st January, 1996 to 1st
st
August, 2000 which amounts to practising discrimination prohibited by
Article 14 of the Constitution of India to the persons belonging to the
same class. It is urged relying upon paragraph 23 of the decision of the
Apex Court in Frank Anthony Public School Employees' Teachers
Association vs. Union of India and others, reported in AIR 1987 SC
311, that the reason that it is not possible for the unaided institutions to
make the payment of arrears on account of revision of pay-scales to the
wp.4176.00
teachers with effect from 01.01.1996 due to paucity of funds, cannot be
a ground for making such discrimination.
3. It is admitted by the respondent-State that the Government
Resolution dated 18.12.1999 is applicable to the question of revision of
pay-scales of teachers in unaided Engineering Colleges and institutions
and as per the said Resolution, the revision of pay-scale was made
effective from 01.01.1996 and the teachers covered by the Government
Resolution were entitled to fixation of pay and preferring claim for
payment of arrears. The question is whether mere shifting of date from
01.01.1996 to 01.08.2000 by Government Resolution dated 4th October
2000 for payment of arrears on account of revision of pay-scales to the
teachers in unaided private colleges from 01.01.1996 to 01.08.2000
can be termed as arbitrary and discriminatory, inasmuch as it provides a
date of 01.01.1996 for implementation of revision of pay-scales to the
employees in aided private colleges who belongs to same category or
class.
4. Learned Assistant Government Pleader invited our attention
to the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in case of State of Orissa and
wp.4176.00
another vs. Aswini Kumar Dash and others, reported in (1998) 3 SCC
613. It was also a case of revision of pay-scales on the basis of
recommendations by the University Grants Commission to the teachers
in aided non-Government Colleges/educational institutions by issuing
Government Resolution dated 06.10.1989 and 06.11.1990 by the State
of Orissa. As per the note appended below "the category of teachers to
whom the pay-scales were made applicable", the aided colleges which
have been given Government concurrence and University affiliation for
opening of 3+ degree courses by April 1989 were covered and not
thereafter. The petition was filed by the teachers who were appointed
primarily in 'plus two' institutions existing as on 01.04.1989 on the
ground that the cut off date of 01.04.1989 prescribed for making
classification is arbitrary and irrational.
5. The Apex Court has in aforesaid decision dealt with this
aspect of the matter in paragraphs 12 and 13 of the said decision,
which are reproduced below :-
"12. The only other contention relates to the
arbitrariness of the cut-off date of 1-4-1989. In this connection,
wp.4176.00
the appellants have pointed out that the resolutions deal with
the quantum of grant-in-aid which the State will provide, inter
alia, to aided non-government colleges; and the basis on which
such grant-in-aid will be provided. For this purpose the State
will provide for revised scales of pay as per the University Grants
Commission's recommendation. The State Government has
framed a scheme for such grants-in-aid looking to its own
financial resources and the number of educational institutions
to which it will be required to give such grant. No educational
institution can claim grant-in-aid as a matter of right. This is
a matter of policy which the State Government will decide
looking to its financial capacity and other relevant
circumstances. There may be, as a result, differences in the pay
scales of teachers of colleges affiliated prior to 1.4.1989 and
colleges affiliated subsequently, although neither of the
resolutions prevent the colleges from giving higher pay scales if
they so desire. In this context, the appellants have pointed out
that even the extent of grant-in-aid varies from college to
college, depending, for example, upon the number of years for
which the college has been functioning. Since the entire burden
of providing grants-in-aid is now on the State, the State
regulates by policy the extent of aid and the colleges to which
it will be given.
13. In the present case the State Government has
decided to provide grants-in-aid to cover the revised UGC
wp.4176.00
scales of pay for those teachers in existing colleges which have
received Government concurrence and university affiliation on
or before 1.4. 1989. The date has a direct nexus with the date
of the decision to provide for such higher pay scale in the grant-
in-aid to be given to the colleges concerned. The date which
is so fixed cannot be considered as arbitrary or
unreasonable. Colleges which have secured Government
concurrence or affiliation from the university after 1.4.1989,
therefore, cannot claim any right to the higher grant-in-aid
contrary to the policy as laid down by the State. The High Court
was, therefore, not right in coming to the conclusion that the
Note to Para 2(1) of the Government Resolution of 6.11.1990,
was arbitrary and unreasonable."
The Apex Court has held that it was for the State
Government to provide grant-in-aid which was not as a matter of right
for the institutions. It holds that the State Government has framed a
scheme for such grant-in-aid looking its own financial resources and the
number of educational institutions to which it will be required to give
such grant. It holds that the State Government has to decide this policy
looking to financial capacity and other relevant circumstances. There
may be, as a result, differences in the pay- scale of teachers of colleges
affiliated prior to 01.04.1989 and colleges affiliated subsequently,
wp.4176.00
although neither of the Resolutions prevent the Colleges from giving
higher pay scales, if they so desire. The Court further holds that the date
which is so fixed cannot be considered as arbitrary or unreasonable.
6. In the present case, what we find is that the Government
Resolution dated 18th December, 1999 though is applicable to the non-
Government unaided Engineering colleges, it clarifies in paragraph 2 of
coverage, as under :
"Coverage:.....However, the unaided colleges/ institutions will
not be entitled for any financial assistance from the State
Government and same is the case with the unapproved posts
in the aided colleges and the institutions not covered under
100 per cent salary grants."
In Clause 14 of the said Government Resolution dealing
with the fixation and preferring the claim for payment of arrears would
consequently apply only to the non-Government aided colleges affiliated
to the non-agricultural Universities. The State Government has not taken
upon itself the financial burden of releasing the arrears of salary on the
basis of revision of pay-scale to the teachers working in non-Government
wp.4176.00
unaided Engineering Colleges and institutions.
7. The subsequent Government Resolution dated 4th October,
2000 being self-explanatory, is reproduced below in its entirety:-
" The State Government has revised the pay scales of the
teachers, Librarians and physical Education Instructors in the
Engineering colleges and other equivalent Technological
institutions at degree level vide Government Resolution, Higher
& Technical Education Department No. RPS 2198/ 77/ TE-6,
dated 18th December,1999. Those revised pay scales are made
applicable to the teachers of the Government, Non-Government
aided and unaided institutions with effect from 1/1/1996.
However, it is brought to the notice of the State Government
that it is not possible for the unaided institutions to make
payment of arrears on account of revision of pay scales to the
teacher with effect from 1.1.1996 due to paucity of funds.
Hence, the Government is pleased to direct that the scheme of
revision of pay scales declared vide Government Resolution dated
18th December 1999, mentioned above, should be made
applicable to the teachers, librarians and instructors of physical
education in the unaided Engineering colleges and other
equivalent institutions of technical education including
Architecture and Pharmacy at degree or equivalent level in the
wp.4176.00
State, with effect from 1st August, 2000."
The aforesaid Government Resolution shifts the date of
implementation of the revision of pay-scales from 01.01.1996 to
01.08.2000 in respect of non-Government unaided Engineering colleges
and institutions. It considers the representation of the Management of
such institutions that it is not possible for them to make the payment of
arrears on account of revision of pay-scales to the teachers with effect
from 01.01.1996 due to paucity of funds. A matter of policy adopted by
the State Government looking to the financial capacity of unaided
institutions in fixing different dates for implementation of revision of
scales cannot be arbitrary or discriminatory. The shifting of date from
01.01.1996 to 01.08.2000 has a direct nexus with the capacity of
unaided colleges to pay the arrears of which the State has refused to
share the burden. In the light of law laid down by the Apex court in the
case of State of Orissa vs. Aswini Kumar Dash (supra), we do not find
that the criteria adopted is arbitrary or irrational or discriminatory for
shifting the date of implementation and, therefore, the Resolution dated
4th October, 2000 cannot be set aside.
wp.4176.00
8. In the result, the Writ Petition is dismissed, with no order as
to costs.
JUDGE JUDGE
sahare
