Ruben vs The Principal Secretary (Higher Education), Education Department, Government of Karnataka and Others

L. Narayana Swamy, J.—Petitioner filed Revision Petition No. 21/2011 before the Principal Secretary to Government of Karnataka Education Department (Higher Education) at Bangalore wherein the said Revision Petition came to be rejected on 12.12.2013. Hence, this petition.

Review petition is filed under section 131 of the Karnataka Education Act, and the prayer made by the petitioner therein was that the petitioner should be paid ''equal pay for equal work'' i.e. on par lecturers/teachers working in the Government aided colleges/schools.

The first respondent-revision authority assigned reason that the teachers in the aided schools cannot be treated on the par with that the lecturers/teachers working in the Government aided colleges/schools for the purpose of equal treatment. Revision authority also rejected the case of the petitioner by relying upon the judgment of the Supreme Court reported in Mrs. Satimbla Sharma and Others Vs. St. Paul''s Senior Secondary School and Others, and another judgment Bharatiya Samskrithi Vidya Peeta Vs. The Secretary to the Government of Karnataka, Education Department and Others, .

The Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the judgment referred for the purpose of dismissing the case of the petitioner therein are in respect of the facts and cases of the said case and the same are not applicable to the facts and circumstances in the instant case for the reason that the validity of the Rule 5 of the Karnataka Private Education Institutions Act was not challenged and as long as said provisions are unchallenged, law presumes that private education institutions have to pay salary which is given to a staff teachers on par with Government aided lecturers/teachers.

Learned Senior Counsel appearing for respondent Nos. 2 to 4 submits to confirm the order passed by the revision authority. Article 39(d) applies to a case whether teachers are on par with each other and are standing on the equal footing. When that being the case they are entitled for equal salary. In the instant case teachers of government aided schools are altogether different for the purpose of treating for extension of equal treatment. In support of her submission the learned Senior counsel relying on the judgment of the Hon''ble Supreme Court in the case of Satimbla (supra) referred paragraph 23 of the judgement which reads thus:

"We also do not think that the Court could issue a mandamus to a private unaided school to pay the salary and allowances equal to the salary and allowances payable to teachers of Government schools or Government aided schools. This is because the 15 salary and allowances of teachers of a private unaided school is a matter of contract between the school and the teacher and is not within the domain of public law."

Heard both sides. The substantial question of law that arise for consideration in this petition is as to whether the teachers working in the unaided private schools are entitled to ''equal pay for equal work'' on par with the teachers of government aided schools.

Article 39 (d) of the Constitution reads thus:

"that there is equal pay for equal work for both men and women".

The said provision comes into picture in the present case. When the teachers of private unaided school and the teachers working in the government aided schools stand on the same footing that they have similar qualification to hold post, the nature of work, tenure of work and the students to whom they teach, working hours, etc. are similar to one another, these similarities would be the guidelines for the purpose of consideration as to whether teachers in private schools are entitled for equal treatment. The provisions of Article 39(d) of the Constitution of India is to be made applicable to the facts and case of the petitioner herein. What is to be considered for the purpose to ''equal pay for equal work'' for teachers working in a private school who also possess the same qualification and they have to teach the students for which the teachers of the aided school also teach, working hours are one and the same and both are governed by law, when that being the case, if the petitioners are treated dissimilarly, it violates the provisions of Article 39 of the Constitution of India.

The judgment referred above by the respondents counsel are not applicable for the reason that in the said judgment the provision is Rule 5 under the Karnataka Private Educational Institutions (Discipline and Control) Rules, 1978 and the said provisions are not of similar nature and hence are not applicable. In the absence of the statutory provisions the Supreme Court has held that teachers of private unaided schools had no right to claim salary equal to that of their counterparts working in government schools and government-aided schools. In the instant case Rule 5 occupies and is binding on the private educational institutions. The validity of the said provisions, as long as are not challenged, it is binding on the parties. Presumption is that the binding nature of the said provision is applicable on the management of private institution and they have to pay equal salary paid on par with the teachers working in aided schools. If the similar treatment is not extended it goes to prove that teachers who are imparting education to the students similar to the one to whom the teachers of the government aided schools teach would be treated as unequals. Further, if they are paid less than to that of the teachers working in aided schools it amounts to discrimination of equals. The decision relied upon by the learned senior counsel does not enure to the benefit of the respondent in the present case. Under the facts and circumstances of the case, I pass the following order:

"Order Annexure-A dated 12.12.2013 passed by the Revision Authority in Revision Petition No. 21/2011 is set aside."

Respondents - private institution is directed to pay salary to the petitioner on par with aided school teachers, with immediate effect.

The petition is disposed of.