Neeraj Kumar vs State Of Uttarakhand & Others

Pankaj Purohit, J

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

The petitioner is working as Assistant Teacher in Junior High School since 2009, as mentioned in the petition. The institution, where the petitioner was initially appointed was recognized by the State Government as “B” Category Grant-in-aid and thereafter, was recognised as “A” Category Grant-in-aid. The Grant-In-Aid Rules were made applicable to this Institution from 2005 & 2007.

It would be apt to submit at this stage that the District Education Officer (Basic) has sanctioned the posts. Thereafter, the posts were advertised in accordance with law. The suitability of the petitioner was adjudged by the duly constituted Selection Committee. Thereafter, appointment of the petitioner was duly approved by the District Education Officer (Basic). The petitioner has worked continuously without any break for more than 10 years and was eligible for selection grade/time scale.

The reason for denial to the petitioner of the selection grade/time scale purportedly is that the institutions, where the petitioner is serving, started getting grant-in-aid only w.e.f. 2005 and 2007. This issue has been clarified by the Director, Primary Education. He has also sent reminder to the State Government to this effect.

The fact of the matter is that in six districts throughout the State of Uttarakhand, the similarly situate Teachers have been granted selection grade/time scale immediately after completion of 10 years’ qualifying service. It has also come on record that the salary of the petitioner was fixed by taking into consideration his entire length of service from the date of his initial appointment and not from the date, when the institution was brought under grant in aid.

The action of the respondents denying the selection grade/time scale to the petitioner at par with other Assistant Teachers serving in these six districts is illegal, arbitrary and unreasonable. Thus, violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India and the equal cannot be treated unequally.

The issue involved in the present writ petition is no longer res-integra. The controversy involved in this writ petition is covered by the judgment and order passed by the Coordinate Bench dated 27.03.2017 passed in WPSS No.1955 of 2015 (Munendra Singh Rana & others vs. State) and batch, which was upheld by the Division Bench of this Court vide judgment dated 30.08.2018 passed in SPA No.279 of 2018 (State vs. Harish Singh Bora & others) and batch. This fact has also been admitted by learned State Counsel.

Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed. The respondents are directed to release selection grade/time scale to the petitioner from his initial date of appointment within a period of eight weeks from today along with arrears. The petitioner is also entitled to interest @ 9% per annum.

It is made clear that if the arrears are not released, the petitioner shall be entitled to interest @18% per annum.