SPA/148/2022
2023 Latest Caselaw 2608 UK

             IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
                                  AT NAINITAL
                   HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI VIPIN SANGHI
                                          AND
                      HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR VERMA

                      SPECIAL APPEAL NO. 148 OF 2022
                          04TH SEPTEMBER, 2023
BETWEEN:
State of Uttarakhand & others                                         .....Appellants.
And

Narayan Dutt Pandey & others                                     ....Respondents.

With SPECIAL APPEAL NO. 149 OF 2022 BETWEEN:

State of Uttarakhand & others .....Appellants.

And

Manorath Pandey                                                   ....Respondent.

Counsel for the Appellants                  :      Mr. C.S. Rawat, learned Chief
                                                   Standing Counsel with Mr. Rajeev
                                                   Singh Bisht, learned Additional
                                                   Chief Standing Counsel.

Counsel for the Respondents                 :      Mr. Harendra        Belwal,   learned
                                                   counsel.

The Court made the following:

JUDGMENT:(per Hon'ble The Chief Justice Sri Vipin Sanghi)

The present special appeal has been preferred by

the State of Uttarakhand to assail the common judgment

rendered by the learned Single Judge in Writ Petition (S/S)

Nos.520 of 2018, 737 of 2018 and 740 of 2018, dated

06.09.2021, whereby the aforesaid writ petitions preferred by

the respondents- writ petitioners were allowed.

2. The writ petitioners are working in different

capacities in the ministerial staff in various Government

Aided/ Grant-in-Aid schools in the State of Uttarakhand. The

grade-pay of the ministerial staff in the Government

establishments were amended vide Government Order dated

16.01.2013, which was made applicable w.e.f. 01.01.2013.

The ministerial staff working in Government Aided/ Grant-in-

Aid schools also sought the same benefit, which was granted

vide Government Order dated 20.10.2016. However, the said

Government Order was made applicable prospectively.

Consequently, the respondents-writ petitioners preferred the

writ petitions, as aforesaid, raising a grievance that they too

should be granted the higher grade-pay w.e.f. 01.01.2013.

3. The stand taken by the State- appellants was that

the ministerial staff working in Government schools cannot be

equated with the ministerial staff working in Government

Aided/ Grant-in-Aid schools.

4. The aforesaid submission of the appellants- State,

in our view, is well-founded, and the writ petitioners could not

have been granted parity in the matter of pay-scales, with

the pay-scale being granted to the ministerial staff working in

Government schools/ Government establishments. However,

the matter does not stop there. The learned Single Judge

takes note of the fact that the higher grade-pay was granted

in respect of teachers, and also in respect of Class-IV

employees in Government Aided/ Grant-in-Aid schools w.e.f.

01.01.2013.

5. That being the position, in our view, only the

ministerial staff working in Government Aided/ Grant-in-Aid

schools could not have been discriminated against, by not

granting them the higher grade-pay, which had been granted

to both- the teachers, and the Class-IV employees in the

same institutions.

6. For the aforesaid reasons, we do not find any

reason to interfere with the impugned judgment.

7. The appeal is, accordingly, dismissed.

8. Pending application, if any, also stands disposed of.

(VIPIN SANGHI, C.J.)

(ALOK KUMAR VERMA, J.) Dated: 04th September, 2023 NISHANT