Supreme Court Allows State Appeals in Compensatory Allowance Dispute; Junior Lecturers Not Entitled to Allowance During Holidays and Leave. Government Orders Sanctioning Compensatory Allowance Do Not Cover Vacation/Leave Period Because Junior Lecturers Perform No Official Duty Then, and Any Exam Evaluation Work Is Separately Remunerated.

In Favour of Prosecution
  • 7
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The dispute pertained to payment of compensatory allowance to junior lecturers in government colleges in Andhra Pradesh. The allowance had been sanctioned by the Government of Andhra Pradesh through G.O.M.S. No. 1059 dated November 11, 1971, and clarified by G.O.M.S. No. 105 dated April 3, 1974, from the Finance & Planning (F.R.I. & L) Department. It was intended for officers from whom residential attenders had been withdrawn, to enable such officers to employ a person or persons to attend to their needs in the discharge of official work at their residence. The allowance was initially fixed at a maximum of Rs. 150 per month, later increased to Rs. 200, and was subsequently extended to senior and junior lecturers working in colleges. The question that arose was whether junior lecturers were entitled to receive this compensatory allowance during holidays and leave period. The matter first came before the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal. A two-member Bench of the Tribunal differed in opinion, and the matter was placed before a third member. By majority, the Tribunal held that junior lecturers were entitled to the payment of the allowance during leave or vacation period. The State of Andhra Pradesh, aggrieved by this decision, appealed to the Supreme Court. While considering the appeals, the Court noted from an office report dated January 5, 1996, that most respondents had been served but did not appear; subsequently, notice was deemed served on all respondents. Leave was granted. The central legal issue was whether the compensatory allowance, which was tied to discharge of official work at residence, could be claimed for periods when no official duty was actually performed. The State contended that during holidays and leave, junior lecturers do not perform any official duty; if they evaluate examination papers, they receive separate remuneration for that evaluation, so they should not be entitled to the compensatory allowance for such periods. The Court examined the government orders and observed that the allowance was meant to enable officers to employ persons to attend to their needs in the discharge of official work at residence. It noted that lecturers would not perform any official duty during holidays. If at all they did any work, such as evaluating examination papers, they would be paid separately for that work. Under these circumstances, the majority members of the Tribunal were not right in concluding that junior lecturers were discharging official duties during vacation or leave period and hence entitled to compensatory allowance. Accordingly, the Supreme Court set aside the Tribunal's decision, allowed the appeals, and held that junior lecturers are not entitled to compensatory allowance during holidays or leave period. No costs were awarded.

Headnote

A) Service Law - Compensatory Allowance - Entitlement during holidays and leave - Government Orders G.O.M.S. No. 105 dated 03.04.1974 and G.O.M.S. No. 1059 dated 11.11.1971 - The issue was whether junior lecturers are entitled to compensatory allowance during holidays and leave period when they perform no official duty. The Supreme Court observed that lecturers do not perform any official duty during holidays, and if they evaluate examination papers they are separately paid for that work. Held that the Tribunal's majority view was erroneous; junior lecturers are not entitled to compensatory allowance during vacation or leave period. Appeals allowed, Tribunal's decision set aside, no costs. (Paras 1-2)

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether junior lecturers are entitled to payment of compensatory allowance during holidays and leave period when no official duty is performed

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The Supreme Court allowed the appeals, set aside the Tribunal's decision, and held that junior lecturers are not entitled to compensatory allowance during holidays or leave period because they perform no official duty then; any evaluation of examination papers is separately paid. No costs.

Law Points

  • Compensatory allowance sanctioned for residential attenders withdrawn is contingent on discharge of official work at residence
  • during holidays/leave junior lecturers perform no official duty
  • examination evaluation is separately remunerated
  • so allowance not payable
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

1996 LawText (SC) (01) 135

1996-01-08

K. Ramaswamy, G.B. Pattanaik

1996 AIR 1059, 1996 SCC (7) 396, JT 1996 (1) 566, 1996 SCALE (1) 477

Secretary to Government of Andhra Pradesh, Finance & Planning

P. Eswar Reddy & Ors.

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Civil appeal before the Supreme Court against an order of the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal allowing compensatory allowance to junior lecturers during holidays and leave period.

Remedy Sought

The appellant (State of Andhra Pradesh) sought to set aside the Tribunal's majority decision and deny payment of compensatory allowance during vacation/leave period to junior lecturers.

Filing Reason

Difference of opinion among a two-member Bench of the Tribunal led to reference to a third member; majority held junior lecturers entitled to allowance during holidays/leave; the State challenged this as contrary to government orders requiring discharge of official duty.

Previous Decisions

The Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal, by majority opinion, held that junior lecturers are entitled to payment of compensatory allowance during leave or vacation period.

Issues

Whether junior lecturers are entitled to compensatory allowance during holidays and leave period when no official duty is performed and any exam evaluation work is separately paid.

Submissions/Arguments

The State contended that junior lecturers do not perform any official duty during holidays or leave; any evaluation of examination papers is separately remunerated; therefore compensatory allowance is not payable for such periods. The Tribunal majority held that junior lecturers are entitled to the compensatory allowance during leave or vacation period.

Ratio Decidendi

Compensatory allowance sanctioned for residential attenders withdrawn from officers (including junior lecturers) is contingent upon discharge of official work at residence. During holidays/leave, junior lecturers perform no official duty; any evaluation of examination papers is separately remunerated; hence they are not entitled to compensatory allowance for that period. The Tribunal's majority view was erroneous.

Judgment Excerpts

Per majority, it was held that they are entitled to the payment of the allowance during the leave or vacation period. It would be seen that the Lecturers would not perform any official duty during holidays. If at all they have done they would evaluate the examination papers for which they would be paid the amount for evaluating the papers. Under these circumstances, the majority members were not right in concluding that they are discharging the official duties during the vacation or leave period and they are entitled to the compensatory allowance.

Procedural History

The matter arose from a difference of opinion among a two-member Bench of the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal regarding entitlement of junior lecturers to compensatory allowance during holidays and leave. The matter was placed before a third member, and by majority, the Tribunal held that junior lecturers are entitled to the allowance during leave/vacation period. The State of Andhra Pradesh appealed to the Supreme Court, which granted leave. Notices were deemed served on all respondents; some did not appear. The Supreme Court set aside the Tribunal's decision.

Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
Supreme Court Supreme Court Partly Allows Criminal Appeals in Gujarat Caste Violence Case and Sets Aside Section 149 IPC and Section 3 TADA Convictions. Individual Appellants Convicted Under Sections 302, 307, and 324 IPC Based on Direct Evidence, While Others Acq...
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Allows Petitions Challenging Levy of Entry Tax on Natural Gas Under Maharashtra Entry Tax Act, 2002 — Holds That Natural Gas Is Not 'Goods' for Entry Tax Purposes When Supplied Through Pipelines