21 July vs State Of Uttarakhand & Others
2025 Latest Caselaw 1193 UK

Uttarakhand High Court

21 July vs State Of Uttarakhand & Others on 21 July, 2025

Author: Manoj Kumar Tiwari

Bench: Manoj Kumar Tiwari

                                                               2025:UHC:6336-DB



  HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
               JUSTICE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR TIWARI
                                      AND
                 JUSTICE SHRI SUBHASH UPADHYAY


               Writ Petition (S/B) No. 558 of 2017
                                21 July, 2025


Panna Lal Diwakar                                                  --Petitioner

                                    Versus

State of Uttarakhand & Others                                  --Respondents
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Presence:-
Mr. Shrikant Purohit, Advocate for the petitioner
Mr. Puran Singh Bisht, Additional C.S.C. for the State/respondents
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------


The Court made the following:
JUDGMENT:

(per Hon'ble Justice Sri Manoj Kumar Tiwari)

1. Petitioner was appointed as Lecturer in a

Government Intermediate College on 24.01.1990. He was

promoted as Headmaster, Government High School w.e.f.

15.07.2000 and thereafter he was promoted as Principal,

Government Intermediate College w.e.f. 15.10.2004. He

retired from service on 31.03.2016. After his retirement,

petitioner filed Writ Petition (S/B) No.452 of 2016, which

was disposed of on 21.11.2016 with a direction to

Secretary, School Education, to take decision on

petitioner's representation within two months. Pursuant to

the order passed in the said writ petition, In-charge

2025:UHC:6336-DB

Secretary, Education Department has passed an order on

26.07.2017, whereby representation of the petitioner was

rejected. Thus, feeling aggrieved, petitioner has filed this

writ petition, challenging the order passed by In-charge

Secretary, referred to above. He has also sought a

mandamus to the respondents to grant him benefit of ACP

as enunciated in G.O. dated 28.02.2009, as amended

from time to time.

2. In para-8 of the impugned order dated

26.07.2017, it is mentioned that the post of Principal to

which petitioner was promoted on 15.10.2004 was in the

pay scale of ₹ 8000-13500, which was equivalent to grade

pay ₹ 5400, which was upgraded to ₹ 10000-15200 and

the benefit of upgraded pay scale was given notionally

w.e.f. 01.01.1996 and actual benefit was payable to

Principals w.e.f. 01.07.2001; thereafter, the pay scale of

teachers was again upgraded in terms of

recommendations made by the Sixth Central Pay

Commission and in pursuance thereof, vide order dated

01.03.2009 issued by the State Government

the pay scale of Principal, Government Intermediate

College was again upgraded from ₹ 10000-15200 grade

pay ₹ 6600 to ₹ 12000-16500 with grade pay of ₹ 7600.

2025:UHC:6336-DB

3. Learned State Counsel submits that before the

last upgradation of pay scale of Principal, Government

Intermediate College, Principals were getting grade pay of

₹ 6600, however, after upgradation of pay scale w.e.f.

01.03.2009, their grade pay became ₹ 7600. Thus, he

submits that since the pay scale of Principals was

upgraded twice, initially w.e.f. 01.01.1996 and again from

01.03.2009, therefore, the claim staked by the petitioner

for benefit of ACP, is misplaced.

4. Learned State Counsel has drawn attention of

this Court to paragraph nos. 4 and 5 of the counter

affidavit filed by Mr. S. B. Joshi, Chief Education Officer,

Dehradun on behalf of respondent nos.3 and 4. Paragraph

nos. 4 and 5 of the counter affidavit are quoted

hereunder:-

"4. That it is pertinent to state here that Uttaranchal Educational (General Education Cadre) Service Rules had been notified on 19.10.2006, where the pay scale of the Principal, Government Inter College, had been fixed at 1000-15200, which was a promotional post as per the Rules. It is stated that vide G.O. dated 20.11.2006 the sanction for upgrading the pay scale of the Principal from 8000-13500 to 10000-15200 was granted. It is stated that thereafter the sanction for the implementation for the recommendations of the 6th Pay Commission was given vide G.O. dated 17.10.2008 and 13.02.2009. It is

2025:UHC:6336-DB

further relevant to state that, in similarity to the Central Government Teacher, vide G.O. dated 01.03.2009 the teacher of the Secondary Schools were sanctioned the benefit of Upgraded Pay Scale w.e.f. 01.04.2009, in the following manner:-

Serial Teacher Present Upgraded Pay Correspondi Corresponding No. Pay/Grade Scale/Grade ng Pay Grade Pay Pay Scale 01 L.T. Teacher 5500-9000 Grade-III Salary 4600 (A) Pay Scale 6500-10500 7450-11500 Band - 2 (B) Selection 7500-12000 Grade-II Salary 4800 Pay Scale 7500-12000 Band-2 (C) Promotional Grade-I Salary 5400 Pay Scale 8000-13500 Band-2 02 Lecturer 6500-10500 Grade-III Salary 4800 (A) Pay Scale 7500-12000 7500-12000 Band-2 (B) Selection 8000-13500 Grade-II Salary 5400 Payscale 8000-13500 Band-3 (C) Promotional Grade-I Salary 6600 Pay Scale 10000-15200 Band-3 03 Head Master 7500-12000 Grade-II Salary 5400 (A) Pay Scale 8000-13500 8000-13500 Band-3 (B) Selection Grade-II Salary 6600 Payscale 10000-15200 Band-3

04 Principal 10000-15200 12000-16500 Salary 7600 Band-3

5. It is stated that the aforesaid G.O. dated 01.03.2009 provided that the teaching staff was being recommended the Higher Pay Scale as compared to the non teaching employees and para 2 (4) provided for separate constitution of educational and administrative cadres. It is stated that vide G.O. dated 14.06.2011 the educational and administrative cadres were separated and the posts of the Head Master, Government High School, and the Principal, Government Inter College, came within the educational cadre. It is further stated that vide G.O. dated 26.06.2012 the incumbents were allocated the respective cadre for which they have opted, between Administrative and Educational Cadre, and the petitioner had opted for the educational cadre. It was further specified in the aforesaid G.O. that those persons who had not exercised any option would be automatically treated to be in Educational cadre. It is further stated

2025:UHC:6336-DB

that the persons selected by the U.P. Public Service Commission for the vacancies of the year 1997, who had opted for the Administrative cadre, had been given the post of Block Education Officer and the post held by the petitioner cannot be compared with the aforesaid posts since the petitioner belongs to educational cadre. It is relevant to state here that in the Government Order dated 01.03.2009, cited above, there is no provision for selection pay scale for the Principal, Government Inter College. It is also stated that the Government Order dated 08.03.2011, regarding the grant of A.C.P., also provides for such benefit on certain conditions limited to only 3 financial upgradations."

5. He submits that the subsequent G.O. dated

08.03.2011 also provides for only 3 financial upgradations

while petitioner has received more than 3 financial

upgradations during his entire service career.

6. Regarding the averment made in para 21 of the

writ petition, learned State Counsel submits that a

Government Order was issued on 07.07.2014 in which it

was provided that such officers of Education Department,

who are absorbed on a higher post then what they were

holding earlier, shall continue to discharge duties as In-

charge, however, they shall not be given any additional

monetary benefits for discharging duties of the higher

post. State Counsel refers to clause 2(4) of the said G.O.

dated 07.07.2014 and submits that it provides that

2025:UHC:6336-DB

persons who are holding a higher post but are absorbed

on a lower post, will be entitled to salary and other

monetary benefits for the posts to which they were

substantively appointed. In other words, he submits that

the employees who are absorbed on a subordinate post,

their pay shall be protected and shall not be reduced on

account of absorption on a lower post. Thus, he submits

that Mr. Nagendra Singh Barthwal and Mr. Uma Dutt

Goswami were given benefit of clause 2(4) of G.O. dated

07.04.2014.

7. Assured Career Progression (ACP) Scheme was

introduced to compensate State employees from

stagnation on a post for want of promotional avenues and

it was decided that even if there is no promotional

avenues, available to a holder of a post, then also he will

get minimum 3 financial upgradations. In the present

case, petitioner was promoted twice, first as Head Master,

Government High School and thereafter as Principal,

Government Intermediate College. After his promotion as

Principal, Government Intermediate College, petitioner

was given two further financial upgradations in view of the

decision taken by the State Government to maintain

parity in pay scales of teachers including principals and

2025:UHC:6336-DB

the members serving in the Central Government. Thus,

the claim raised by the petitioner for further financial

upgradation appears to be not based on the policy

applicable to State employees. A government servant can

claim a benefit, which is admissible to him/her, as per

Rules or as per Government Policy. Since petitioner has

not been able to show any Rule/Policy, which has been

violated in his case, therefore, we do not find any reason

to interfere in the mater.

8. Accordingly, writ petition fails and the same is

hereby dismissed.

(Subhash Upadhyay, J.) (Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.) 21.07.2025 21.07.2025

Rajni

RAJINI DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, 2.5.4.20=97cfa6e4cbd49c07b876db4844 8ac3701a9ae475a2547e4b7f1d9b1f17d

GUSAIN 01342, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=8D039BC77BD1A2222B4 DF4FC80D4557562F95BEBA013F530616 A158A0A878BD8, cn=RAJINI GUSAIN Date: 2025.07.30 12:08:44 +05'30'