Rajasthan High Court
Anjuman Talimul Muslemeen/Secr vs R N G E I T And Ors on 20 September, 2024
Author: Sameer Jain
Bench: Sameer Jain
[2024:RJ-JP:26382]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 6871/1999
1. The Anjuman Talimul Muslemeen, through the Secretary,
Management Committee, Moti doongari Road, Jaipur
2. The Head Master, Muslim Primary School, Geejgarh House,
Mohalla Mahawatan, Ghatgate, Jaipur.
----Petitioner
Versus
1. The Rajasthan Non-government Educational Institutions
Tribunal, Rajasthan, Jaipur Through its Presiding Officer, Mini
Secretariat, Bani Park, Jaipur.
2. State of Rajasthan through its Secretary to the Govt.
Department of Education, Secretariat, Jaipur.
3. The Director of Primary and Secondary Education Rajasthan,
Bikaner
4. The District Education Officer, (Boys) Jaipur.
5. Jamilul Islam S/o Shri Qamar Ul Islam, Resident of 5316, C/o
Qasim Khan Pathan, Near Ragiroon Ki Kothi, Ghatgate, Jaipur
Rajasthan.
----Respondent
Connected With
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 4360/2002
Jamilul Islam aged about 42 years S/o Shri Kamrul Islam, C/o
Kasim Khan Pathan, Near Regron Ki Kothi, Ghatgate, Jaipur
Rajasthan.
----Petitioner
Versus
1. The Rajasthan Non-government Educational Institutions
Tribunal, Rajasthan, Jaipur Through its Presiding Officer, Mini
Secretariat, Bani Park, Jaipur.
2. State of Rajasthan through its Secretary to the Govt.
Department of Education, Secretariat, Jaipur.
3. The Director of Primary and Secondary Education Rajasthan,
Bikaner
4. The District Education Officer, (Boys) Jaipur.
5. The Anjuman Talimul Muslemeen, through the Secretary,
Management Committee, Moti doongari Road, Jaipur
[2024:RJ-JP:26382] (2 of 15) [CW-6871/1999]
----Respondent
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 2252/2012
Jamilul Islam aged about 42 years S/o Shri Kamrul Islam, C/o
Kasim Khan Pathan, Near Regron Ki Kothi, Ghatgate, Jaipur
Rajasthan.
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State of Rajasthan through Secretary Secondary Education,
Government of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur
2. Director, Secondary Education, Rajasthan, Bikaner.
3. Anjuman Talimul Muslemeen Muslim School Moti Doondari
through its Secretary, Jaipur.
4. Headmaster, Muslim Primary School, G House, Mahavatan Ka
Mohalla, Ghat Gate, Jaipur.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Pradeep Singh
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Ankit Sethi with
Mr. Rupendra Singh Rathore
Mr. Chandra Shekhar for
Mr. Bharat Saini, AGC
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SAMEER JAIN
Order
Reserved on :: 22/05/2024
Pronounced on :: 20/09/2024
1. As per the directions of the Hon'ble Chief Justice, the present
bunch of petitions were listed before this Court under the head of
'Legacy/Old Matters', warranting preferred hearing and early
disposal.
2. Therefore, with the consent of learned counsel appearing on
behalf of all the sides, as the petitions stemmed from an
interconnected factual matrix, the same were jointly taken up for
final disposal.
[2024:RJ-JP:26382] (3 of 15) [CW-6871/1999]
3. By virtue of the present bunch of the petitions, a cross-
challenge is raised against the order impugned dated 17.08.1999,
by both- the 'Society/Institution' (petitioner in S.B. CWP No.
6871/1999) as well as the 'Employee' (petitioner in S.B. CWP No.
4360/2002). Additionally, S.B. CWP No. 2252/2012 is preferred by
the 'Employee' with a prayer for consideration of the candidature
of the employee on the same pedestal as his similarly situated co-
workers/employees for absorption in service and consequential
relief(s).
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner-Employee (S.B. CWP No.
4360/2002) has submitted that the petitioner Jamil-Ul-Islam was
appointed as a Class IV employee in the respondent-Institute on
08.08.1996. However, with effect from 01.09.1986, the petitioner-
employee started rendering his services as Teacher Grade III in
the institute run by the respondent-society, till the Year 1995, for
a continuous period of 9 years. Learned counsel submitted that
the petitioner had acquired 'Adib Kamil' Degree in the Year 1989,
which is equivalent to the qualification of B.A. It is averred that
the said degree was acquired by the petitioner-employee with the
due permission of the respondent-society/institute as there was a
scarcity of teachers and/or resources. Learned counsel for the
petitioner-employee averred that after rendering services as
Teacher Grade-III for 9 years, the petitioner-employee pursued
the respondent-society/institute for regularization on the said
post. However, much to the shock and surprise of the petitioner-
employee, the respondent-society/institute restrained the
[2024:RJ-JP:26382] (4 of 15) [CW-6871/1999]
petitioner-employee from entering the institute's premises and
from signing in the attendance register.
5. Therefore, being aggrieved of the harassment caused by the
respondent-society/institute when posed with the claim of
regularization, the petitioner filed an application under Section 21
of the Rajasthan Non-Government Educational Institution Act,
1989 (hereinafter, Act of 1989) before the learned Tribunal.
Learned counsel for the petitioner-employee further submitted
that after hearing both the sides, the learned Tribunal passed the
impugned order dated 17.08.1999, by way of which the learned
Tribunal duly held as under:-
5.1 That the petitioner-employee had indeed rendered his
services on the post of Teacher Grade III at the institute run by
the respondent-society for a continuous period of 9 years i.e. from
1986-1995, despite the fact that he was initially appointed as a
Class IV employee (Peon).
5.2 That despite the aforesaid recognition of the services
rendered, the learned Tribunal did not delve into the aspect of
regularization as the purview of the Act of 1989 precluded it from
doing so. However, looking to the services rendered by the
petitioner-employee, the learned Tribunal directed the respondent-
society/institute to pay to the petitioner-employee wages
equivalent to the minimum payscale of 1200-2500 i.e. Rs. 1200
along with benefits, without increment, for the period subsisting
between 16.05.1988 to 15.05.1995.
6. In this background, learned counsel for the petitioner-
employee submitted that being aggrieved of the order impugned
[2024:RJ-JP:26382] (5 of 15) [CW-6871/1999]
dated 17.08.1999, the Institute/society preferred a writ petition
before this Court, numbering S.B. CWP No. 6871/1999, wherein
no interim protection was granted to the Institute/Society
precluding them from making the payment as directed vide order
impugned dated 17.08.1999. However, despite the same, till date
i.e. even after the lapse of 25 years from the passing of the said
order, no compliance has been effectuated qua the order
impugned.
7. Learned counsel for the petitioner-employee further
submitted that the petitioner-employee, being aggrieved of the
order impugned dated 17.08.1999 as well, insofar as it pertained
to non-regularization of the petitioner-employee's services,
preferred a review application against the order impugned, which
came to be dismissed as well vide order dated 10.09.2001.
Therefore, challenging the aforesaid orders, the petitioner-
employee preferred S.B. CWP No. 4360/2002.
8. At this juncture, learned counsel for the petitioner-employee
submitted that during the period subsisting between the Years
1995-2005, on account of the wrongful actions of the
Society/Institute by way of which the petitioner-employee was
restrained from rendering his services as Teacher Grade III
despite the recognition of the same by the learned Tribunal, the
petitioner remained idle and faced extreme financial harassment
making it impossible to run his household. Therefore, looking to
the financial direness and for survival, the petitioner preferred an
application in S.B. CWP No. 4360/2002, to work under protest as
a Class IV employee till the final adjudication of the petition.
[2024:RJ-JP:26382] (6 of 15) [CW-6871/1999]
9. As a result, the petitioner-employee was allowed to render
services as a Class IV employee in the Year 2005, which he
continued to do so until his superannuation in the Year 2021.
However, even during the said period, the petitioner-employee
was never paid in parity with the other government employees
working on the same post. Learned counsel further submitted that
on 12.12.2005, this Court passed an interim order in favour of the
petitioner-employee whereby the Institute/Society was required to
allow the petitioner-employee to render his services as a Class IV
employee along with all the benefits the post attracts, without
prejudice to any of his rights, until the final adjudication of the
petition.
10. Learned counsel for the petitioner-employee further
submitted that in the Year 2010, the Society/Institute with the
malafide intention of harassing the petitioner, did not pay the
petitioner as per the pay scale of Class IV employees, whilst not
keeping parity in pay with government employees on the same
post, in total dereliction of the order dated 12.12.2005 and
despite the application of the Rajasthan Voluntary Rural Services
Rules 2010 which provided for absorbing the employees of Non-
Government recognized and aided institutions in Government
Services.
11. Therefore, being aggrieved of the aforesaid actions of the
Society/Institute, the petitioner moved a second stay application
wherein it was prayed that the Society/Institute consider the case
of the petitioner as per the Rules of 2010 and for the issuance of
directions to the effect that the petitioner-employee be paid within
[2024:RJ-JP:26382] (7 of 15) [CW-6871/1999]
the meaning of the order dated 12.12.2005, as passed by this
Court, maintaining parity qua the petitioner-employee with the
other employees on the same post. As a result, vide order dated
23.09.2011, this Court again issued directions to the
Society/Institute to pay the dues of the petitioner within the
meaning of the order dated 12.12.2005 maintaining the parity in
pay with government employees and in consonance with the
settled law. Simultaneously, on the aspect of absorption, liberty
was granted to the petitioner to prefer a fresh writ petition for
application of the Rules of 2010.
12. In this comprehensive background, learned counsel for the
petitioner-employee submitted that in spite of the passing of 20
years, and orders dated 12.12.2005 and 23.09.2011
mandating/requiring the Society/Institute to pay the arrears to the
petitioner-employee as ordered vide order impugned dated
17.08.1999, no such payment has been made till date, in blatant
violation of this Court's said orders. Learned counsel further
submitted that in the contempt proceedings in D.B. Civil Writ
Petition No. 507/2022, the Hon'ble Division Bench vide order
dated 03.11.2022 had expressly obligated the Director of
Secondary Education to immediately release the dues payable to
the petitioner-employee as per the directions issued by this Court
from time to time, as noted above, and also in sync with the
directions issued by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of State of
Rajasthan vs. Manju Saxena and Ors: Special Leave to Appeal (C)
No. 13791/2019, wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court had directed
the compliance to be made within a period of eight weeks.
[2024:RJ-JP:26382] (8 of 15) [CW-6871/1999]
13. Therefore, in conclusion, learned counsel for the petitioner-
employee argued that despite the passing of the orders dated
12.12.2005, 23.09.2011 and 03.11.2022, and the petitioner-
employee having superannuated in the Year 2021 without
receiving proper pay, no compliance has been made to the order
impugned dated 17.08.1999, which is against the mandate of law
and the principles of natural and swift justice. Moreover, during
the course of hearing, the matter was even referred for mediation
wherein the petitioner-employee claimed payment of arrears to
the tune of Rs. 18.27 lacs, but the same was turned down by the
Society/Institute. Therefore, learned counsel for the petitioner-
employee has prayed that the instant petition be allowed in terms
of the prayers so advanced. In support of the arguments
advanced, learned counsel has placed reliance upon the
judgments enunciated in Neelima Shrivastava vs. State of
U.P.: Civil Appeal No. 4840/2021, Bhagwan Das and Ors.
vs. State of Haryana reported in (1987) 4 SCC 634 and State
of Haryana vs. Chiranjit Singh and Ors. reported in (2006) 9
SCC 321.
14. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent-
Institute/Society (petitioner in S.B. CWP No. 6871/1999) has
submitted that the Society-Anjuman Talimul Muslemeen, Jaipur is
a registered society having dozens of institutes governed by the
Act of 1989, which came into effect from 01.04.1993. Learned
counsel submitted that the Society, has a central office approved,
recognized and aided by the Government of Rajasthan, through
which the all the institutions of the Society are administered/run.
[2024:RJ-JP:26382] (9 of 15) [CW-6871/1999]
Whilst disputing the averments put forth by the counsel for the
petitioner-employee, learned counsel for the Society/Institute
submitted as under:-
14.1 That the petitioner-employee was appointed as a Class
IV Servant in the Central Office of the Society vide order dated
08.08.1986 from the list sent by Employment Exchange.
14.2 The services of the petitioner-employee were confirmed
as Class IV on 01.09.1987. At the time of joining, the educational
qualifications of the petitioner-employee were middle class pass
only.
14.3 That an agreement was executed between the
petitioner-employee and the Society as per the Grant-in Aid Rules
1963, where the petitioner-employee was shown as a Class IV
servant only. Moreover, the entire service record of the petitioner-
employee has recognized the employee to be of Class IV, to which
no objection was raised by the petitioner-employee, up until the
present litigation.
14.4 That the petitioner-employee, who was only middle
class pass at the time of appointment as Class IV employee,
applied to appear in the Secondary Examination in 'English'
subject only, as he already possessed the certificate of 'Adib' in
Urdu so as to become equivalent to Matric.
14.5 That subsequently, the petitioner-employee requested
the management of the Society to put his services as a Class IV
employee at the disposal of the Muslim Primary School, Jaipur,
which was nearer to his residence. Thereafter, the petitioner-
[2024:RJ-JP:26382] (10 of 15) [CW-6871/1999]
employee started teaching to some lower primary classes without
any order of appointment of teacher by the Central Office.
15. In this background, learned counsel for the Society/Institute
submitted that the petitioner-employee preferred an application
under Section 21 of the Act of 1989 before the learned Tribunal for
regularization and confirmation after a period of 3 years of service
and for payment of salary equivalent to that of Teacher Grade III
along with interest and PF. In response, the Society/Institute
opposed the said application, in light of the fact that the
petitioner-employee was admittedly a Class IV employee.
Moreover, commencing the Year 1995, the petitioner-employee
was on willful absence. Therefore, the order impugned dated
17.08.1999, as passed by the learned Tribunal, mandating the
payment for a period of 9 years qua the post of Teacher Grade III
is unjust and arbitrary, as the petitioner-employee was a Class IV
employee (Peon), as opposed to a Teacher Grade III.
16. Heard and considered the arguments advanced by the
learned counsel for both the sides, scanned the record of the
instant petition and perused through the judgments cited at Bar.
17. It is trite law that there is a limited scope of interference with
a well-reasoned order while exercising the jurisdiction under
Article 227 of the Constitution of India. It is a well settled principle
of law that in the guise of exercising jurisdiction under Article 227
of the Constitution of India, the High Court cannot convert itself
into a court of appeal, re-engaging with the determination of
facts. It is equally well settled, that the supervisory jurisdiction
extends to keeping the subordinate Tribunals within the limits of
[2024:RJ-JP:26382] (11 of 15) [CW-6871/1999]
their authority and seeing that they obey the law. Though the
powers under Article 227 are wide, they must be exercised
sparingly and only to keep subordinate courts and Tribunals within
the bounds of their authority and not to correct mere errors.
18. Upon an assiduous perusal of the record of the instant batch
of writ petitions, including the order impugned dated 17.08.1999
passed by the learned Tribunal, the following germane factual
considerations have come to light, namely:-
18.1 That in the present dispute, cross petitions are filed
against the order impugned dated 17.08.1999, by both- the
'Society/Institution' (petitioner in S.B. CWP No. 6871/1999) as
well as the 'Employee' (petitioner in S.B. CWP No. 4360/2002).
Additionally, S.B. CWP No. 2252/2012 is preferred by the
'Employee' with a prayer for absorption.
18.2 That the Anjuman Talimul Muslemeen, Jaipur is a
registered Society in Jaipur, which is run by a Management
Committee, administering/managing dozens of schools vide its
Central Office. The Society/Institute is a majority institute, which
is approved, aided and recognized by the Government of
Rajasthan. The Rajasthan Non-Govt. Educational Institutions Act,
1989, which came into force w.e.f. 01.04.1993 is applicable qua
the Society, only for the period commencing subsequent to the
said date.
18.3 That the petitioner-employee admittedly possessed
middle-class qualifications, as a consequence of which, he was
appointed as a Class IV employee in the Central Office of the
Society on 08.08.1986 under the reference of Employment
[2024:RJ-JP:26382] (12 of 15) [CW-6871/1999]
Exchange. The said fact of employment as well as the educational
qualification is reflected by the agreement so entered into
between the Society and the petitioner-employee as well as the
latter's service record.
18.4 That pursuant to having joined the duties as a Class IV
employee on the post of Peon, with due permission of the
institute, certain additional qualifications were obtained by the
petitioner-employee, including the certificate of an 'Adib' in the
Urdu Language, which is equivalent to the Metric Qualification.
18.5 That in this background, the petitioner-employee had
requested the management of the Society to put his services as a
Class IV employee at the disposal of the Muslim Primary School,
Jaipur.
18.6 That the learned Tribunal, on the basis of the evidence
available on record, has given a finding of fact that though the
petitioner-employee joined the services of the Society as a Class
IV employee, subsequent to his transfer at the Muslim Primary
School, during the period subsisting between the Year 1986 to
1995, the Society/Institute had benefitted from his services as a
Teacher who conducted classes for the lower primary grades. In
this regard, the learned Tribunal held that any teacher, as per the
guidelines of the Education Department, teaching the primary
classes, despite being unskilled, can be recognized as a Teacher
Grade III.
19. Therefore, considering the factual finding which established
the factum of the petitioner-employee having rendered services on
the post of Teacher Grade III for a period of 9 years, despite
[2024:RJ-JP:26382] (13 of 15) [CW-6871/1999]
having been appointed as a Class IV Peon, the learned Tribunal
whilst passing the order impugned dated 17.08.1999, did not
comment upon the regularization of the services of the petitioner-
employee as a Teacher Grade III, but rather passed an order
taking note of the balance of convenience, whereby a specific
amount with allowance and benefits under the payscale of Teacher
Grade III was awarded to the petitioner-employee, for the
prescribed period of 9 years only. Therefore, the order impugned
dated 17.08.1999, which was passed looking to the balance of
convenience, while rewarding the services rendered by the
petitioner-employee as Teacher Grade III whilst also taking note of
his initial appointment as Class IV Peon, calls for no interference
of this Court.
20. In the opinion of this Court, the learned Tribunal has passed
a well-reasoned speaking order and after consideration of material
aspects and evidence, arrived at a logical conclusion. This Court is
in complete agreement with the reasoning adopted by the learned
Tribunal. No palpable error has crept in the order impugned dated
17.08.1999, warranting interference of this Court under Article
227 of the Constitution of India.
21. However, having taken note of the reasonability and
infallibility of the order impugned dated 17.08.1999, which was
passed after having taken note of the balance of convenience for
both the sides, this Court cannot help but agonizingly take note of
the fact that despite the order for payment of arrears having been
passed in the Year 1999 in favour of the petitioner-employee
Jamil-Ul-Islam, no such payment has been made till date by the
[2024:RJ-JP:26382] (14 of 15) [CW-6871/1999]
Society, even after the lapse of 25 years. The agony further
perpetuates by the actions of the Anjuman Talimul Muslemeen,
Jaipur (Society) which has continued to act in disobeyance of the
orders dated 12.12.2005 and 23.09.2011, passed by this Court in
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 4360/2002 mandating compliance of
the order dated 17.08.1999, in the absence of any interim
protection having been granted in favour of the Society.
22. As a result, in cumulative light of the aforesaid, this Court
deems it appropriate to dispose of S.B. CWP Nos. 6871/1999 and
4360/2002, which have been filed against the order impugned
dated 17.08.1999, with a direction to the Society- Anjuman
Talimul Muslemeen, Jaipur to immediately effectuate compliance
with the order impugned dated 17.08.1999. While doing so, the
Society- Anjuman Talimul Muslemeen, Jaipur shall be required to
pay the dues of Mr. Jamil-Ul-Islam with interest of 6% from the
date of the Tribunal's order, against the amount so calculated for
the relief granted by the Tribunal. If the said amount is not paid
within a period 90 days from the date of passing of this order, an
enhanced rate of 15% interest shall be applicable, which shall be
paid by the Management Committee of the Anjuman Talimul
Muslemeen, Jaipur, in their personal capacity, equally.
23. Whereas, S.B. CWP No. 2252/2012 is disposed of in light of
the order dated 03.11.2022 passed in D.B. Civil Contempt Petition
No. 507/2022 and it is held that if the Society- Anjuman Talimul
Muslemeen, Jaipur, being an aided institute has claimed any aid
and regularized/absorbed employees, whose service has been
identical to that of the employee- Mr. Jamil-Ul-Islam, then the
[2024:RJ-JP:26382] (15 of 15) [CW-6871/1999]
same benefit as accorded to such employees for the relevant
period be extended in favour of Mr. Jamil-Ul-Islam, within a period
of three months, otherwise the petitioner shall be at liberty to file
a fresh contempt/appropriate petition against the said inaction.
24. In light of the aforesaid, the present petitions are disposed
of. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of.
(SAMEER JAIN),J
Pooja /2-5
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
