Case Note & Summary
The petitioners, two teachers working in a primary ashram school, challenged a circular dated 9th October 2003 issued by the Project Officer, Integrated Tribal Development Project, Dahanu, which directed that teachers working in the primary ashram school be treated as untrained primary teachers and their salary be refixed in the pay scale of untrained primary teachers. The petitioners were appointed as Assistant Teachers in the secondary section of the school, which had classes from Standard I to X, with the primary section covering Standards I to IV and the secondary section covering Standards V to X. Petitioner No.1 held an M.A., B.Ed. and was appointed on 16th June 1986 in the D.Ed. scale of Rs.290-540. Petitioner No.2 held a B.P.Ed. and was appointed on 23rd July 1987 in the same D.Ed. scale. The court considered whether the petitioners, who were qualified and appointed in the secondary section, could be treated as untrained primary teachers. The court held that the petitioners were trained teachers with B.Ed. or equivalent qualifications and were appointed to work in the secondary section. The circular treating them as untrained primary teachers and directing refixation of salary was arbitrary and illegal. The court quashed the circular and directed that the petitioners' pay scale be protected and not reduced to that of untrained primary teachers.
Headnote
A) Service Law - Pay Scale - Trained Teachers - Teachers holding B.Ed. or equivalent qualifications cannot be treated as untrained primary teachers and cannot have their pay scale reduced to that of untrained primary teachers - The impugned circular directing refixation of salary in the pay scale of untrained primary teachers was quashed - Held that the petitioners, who were appointed in the secondary section and possessed B.Ed. or B.P.Ed. qualifications, were entitled to the D.Ed. scale and protection of their existing pay scale (Paras 1-6).
Issue of Consideration
Whether teachers holding B.Ed. or equivalent qualifications can be treated as untrained primary teachers and have their pay scale reduced to that of untrained primary teachers.
Final Decision
The court quashed the circular dated 9th October 2003 and directed that the petitioners' pay scale be protected and not reduced to that of untrained primary teachers.
Law Points
- Pay scale protection
- trained teacher definition
- B.Ed. qualification
- D.Ed. scale
- circular quashed
- legitimate expectation
- right to salary
Case Details
2006 LawText (BOM) (04) 69
Writ Petition No. 8117 of 2003
V.G. Palshikar, V.R. Kingaonkar
Mr. N. V. Bandiwadekar for the Petitioners, Mr. S.R. Nargolkar, AGP for Respondent Nos.1 to 3
Shri Zulal Sayara Rajput and Shri Bhagwan Dharmaji Dhole
The State of Maharashtra, The Secretary, Tribal Development Department, The Project Officer, Integrated Tribal Development Project, Dahanu, The Secretary General, Balkan-Ji-Bari (Child Welfare Association of India), The Head Master, Balkan-Ji-Bari Ashram Shalla Primary Section
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Writ petition challenging a circular that directed treating teachers as untrained primary teachers and refixing their salary in a lower pay scale.
Remedy Sought
Quashing of the circular dated 9th October 2003 and protection of the existing pay scale.
Filing Reason
The petitioners, who were trained teachers with B.Ed. and B.P.Ed. qualifications, were directed to be treated as untrained primary teachers and their salary was to be refixed in the pay scale of untrained primary teachers.
Issues
Whether the petitioners, who are trained teachers with B.Ed. or equivalent qualifications and appointed in the secondary section, can be treated as untrained primary teachers.
Whether the circular directing refixation of salary in the pay scale of untrained primary teachers is valid.
Submissions/Arguments
The petitioners argued that they are trained teachers with B.Ed. and B.P.Ed. qualifications and were appointed in the secondary section, hence cannot be treated as untrained primary teachers.
The respondents did not appear or contest the petition.
Ratio Decidendi
Teachers holding B.Ed. or equivalent qualifications cannot be treated as untrained primary teachers and are entitled to the pay scale applicable to trained teachers. A circular that arbitrarily downgrades their pay scale is illegal and liable to be quashed.
Judgment Excerpts
Both the Petitioners herein are teachers working in a primary school. They impugn Circular dated 9th October, 2003 issued by Respondent No.3 by which direction is issued to treat teachers working in Primary Ashram School as untrained primary teachers and to refix their salary in the pay scale of untrained primary teachers.
Petitioner No.1 is M.A., B.Ed. and was appointed as Assistant Teacher in Balkan-Ji-Bari Post Basic Ashram Vidyalaya, Dist. Thane, w.e.f. 16th June, 1986. He was placed in the scale of Rs.290-540, which is D.Ed. scale.
Petitioner No.2 is B.P.Ed. and was appointed as an Assistant Teacher in the same School w.e.f. 23rd July, 1987 in the D.Ed. scale.
Procedural History
The petitioners filed Writ Petition No. 8117 of 2003 in the High Court of Judicature at Bombay challenging the circular dated 9th October 2003. The court heard the matter and delivered judgment on 27th April 2006.
