Shankar N. Holihosur and Others vs State of Karnataka and Others

Aravind Kumar, J.—Though matter is listed in ''B'' Group by consent of learned advocates appearing for the parties, it is taken up for final disposal.

Heard Sri. K.B. Muralidhar, learned counsel appearing for petitioners, Sri. Ravi B. Hosamani, learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for respondents 1 to 3 and 5, Sri. S.N. Rajendra, learned Central Government standing counsel for respondent No. 4, Sri. S.C. Bhima Raddi, learned Central Government Standing Counsel for respondent No. 4 in W.P. 113041-113050/2014 and Sri. M.S. Hiremath, learned counsel appearing for respondents 6 to 8. Perused the papers.

Petitioners who have since retired on attaining the age of superannuation and in some cases legal heirs of deceased employees have presented these petitions seeking for payment of UGC Scale for the period relating to 01.01.2006 to 23.12.2009 which has not been paid to them contending inter alia that UGC pay scale came to be introduced in the State of Karnataka to Teachers, Librarians and Physical Education Personnel of Universities and Colleges in the year 1990 with effect from 01.01.86 and said pay scales were to be revised once in 10 years and accordingly it came to be revised with effect from 01.01.96. It is also contended that next revision took place with effect from 01.01.2006 and Government of India by communication dated 31.12.2008 addressed to UGC by marking a copy of said communication to Chief Secretaries of all the States had sanctioned revision of pay scale to the Teachers and equivalent cadres working in various Universities and colleges with effect from 01.01.2006 by providing 80% financial assistance to the respective State Governments from 01.01.2006 to 31.03.2010 vide Annexure-B and indicating thereunder that remaining 20% is to be borne by State Governments. It is contended that said revision was also implemented in the State of Karnataka as recommended by UGC vide order dated 24.12.2009 Annexure-C passed by Government of Karnataka. On account of non payment of arrears for the period 01.01.2006 to 23.12.2009 petitioners are before this court.

Respondents 1 to 3 have filed their statement of objections contending inter alia that it is not mandatory for the State Government to first make payment of 80% of the arrears and thereafter claim reimbursement from the Government of India at the cost of sacrificing its developmental work and diverting the said funds for making payment to petitioners and similarly placed persons on the ground a sum of Rs. 1,000 crore being involved in payment of arrears. It is also contended that 20% of the arrears of pay revision for the said period has already been released by the Government of Karnataka. However, on the ground that Government of India has not released its share of 80% in the revision of UGC pay scales in respect of Teachers of Universities and Colleges in the State. It is contended that it is not in a position to release said amount. It is contended that despite such bottle neck it has paid more than 20% of the arrears of UGC pay revision to the tune of Rs. 18,51,84,800/- by releasing the said amount to Collegiate Education Department.

Having heard the learned advocates appearing for the parties and on perusal of statement of objections and also annexures appended to the writ petition it would emerge that undisputedly petitioners are entitled for payment of arrears of UGC pay scale for the period relating to 01.01.2006 to 31.03.2010. The proportionality in the said revision of pay scale is to be apportioned between the Central Government and State Government in the ratio of 80:20. Government order dated 24.12.2009 Annexure-C would clearly indicate that as per clause 10 of the revised UGC pay scale payable to the petitioners and similarly placed persons was effective from 01.01.2006 and this order by the State Government came to be passed pursuant to the letter dated 31.12.2008 issued by Government of India, Ministry of Human Resources which has been addressed to Chief Secretaries of all the State Governments amongst other addressees. A perusal of the communication dated 31.12.2008 Annexure-B issued by Government of India would clearly indicate that under clause 8(p)(v)(b) and (c) that UGC pay-scale scheme is extended to Universities and Colleges and other educational institutions coming under the purview of said legislation and State Government opting for revision of pay so as to meet 20% of the additional expenditure from its own sources and financial assistance from the Central and State government which opts and adopts the revision pay scale of teachers shall be limited to the extent of 80% of the additional expenditure involved in the implementation of such revision. In other words the State Government has by virtue of adopting UGC pay scale to be paid to Teachers and employees working in Universities by order dated 24.12.2009 Annexure-C and has adopted and implemented the UGC scheme, whereunder it has agreed to pay revised pay scale to the petitioners and similarly placed persons.

Infact similar issue had come up before the Coordinate Bench of this court in W.P. 15175/2009 which came to be disposed of on 07.12.2010 vide Annexure-L. In the said proceedings learned Additional Government Advocate appearing on behalf of the State had stated as under:

"5. Therefore, referring to the stand taken in the additional objection statement, the learned Government Advocate argued that whatever the arrears to which the petitioner is entitled for the period from 01.01.2006 to 30.04.2008 would be paid to the petitioner after receiving necessary particulars in this regard from the institution concerned and also the grant being obtained from the Government." 7. Placing the said submission on record this court issued directions to the respondents to pay the arrears and difference in the increment and also payment of additional increments. Directions issued by Co-ordinate Bench of this court reads as under:

"The respondents shall ensure that the petitioner be paid all the arrears and the difference in the increment as well and also payment of additional increments from the date on which the petitioner obtained his Ph.D. decree i.e., from 20.11.1996, and after obtaining necessary information/particulars from the respective institutions, as mentioned in the note, the respondents shall ensure that the petitioner is paid all the arrears to which he is entitled as per law.

If the respondents do not take any steps in regard to payment of arrears to the petitioner, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, for the subsequent period, the amount to which the petitioner is entitled to will also carry interest at 6%."

It is not in dispute that petitioner in W.P. 15175/2009 was not extended the benefit. As such he initiated contempt proceedings in C.C.C. No. 1757/2011 and during the pendency of the said proceedings payment came to be made in favour of the complainant therein and as such contempt proceedings came to be dropped. Petitioners in these instant petitions are all similarly placed persons as that of petitioners-complainant in WP No. 15175/2009 and CCC No. 1757/2011 and undisputedly even according to the statement of objections filed by the respondent-State it would indicate that, petitioners would be entitled to the revised pay scales with effect from 01.01.2006. Infact, State Government has already released payment of arrears with effect from 24.12.2009 which fact is also admitted by the learned counsel appearing for petitioners. Thus, what remains to be paid to the petitioners in respect of revised pay scale is for the period 01.01.2006 upto 23.12.2009. Said amount having not been released petitioners have approached this court for releasing the said amount and on the ground on which the State Government intends to stave off its liability to pay the said amounts or attempting to postpone the payment is on the ground of financial constraints. Infact an ex-Reader in Agriculture Engineering Department at Barhalganj District, Gorakhpur, Uttar Pradesh State claiming similar relief namely for issuing a direction to the authorities to pay the arrears of revised pay-scale to the members of "Uttar Pradesh University College Professors with effect from 01.01.2006 to 30.11.2008 had approached the High Court of Uttar Pradesh and Division Bench after considering the contentions raised which is similar and identical to the contentions raised by the State Government in these instant petitions, rejected the same and held that teachers would be entitled to the revision of pay scales, payment of salary relating to the period 01.01.2006 to 31.03.2008. Infact contention raised by the State Government (Uttar Pradesh) in the said writ petition was to the effect that on account of Central Government not having paid its contribution to an extent of 80% as agreed to the contribution payable by the State Government namely 20% was not being paid was also not accepted by Division Bench of Uttar Pradesh High Court. It has been held that when State Government had accepted the terms and conditions of the scheme and thereby it was bounden duty of the State Government to act upon it and thereby rejected the contention raised by the State. Accordingly direction came to be issued as under:

"Accordingly, impugned order xx quashed. State Government is directed to release the necessary funds for payment of salary of teachers of National Post Graduate College, Barhalganj, Gorakhpur within a maximum period of one month from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. Before parting, we would like to observe that if any request for reimbursement of the amount is made by the State Government, then the Central Government will release the necessary funds as per the provisions of scheme as has been assured by the Counsel for the Union of India within a period of three months from the date of order." 9. At the cost of repetition as already noticed herein above, State Government in the instant case has adopted UGC pay scales to be paid to Teachers, Librarians and Physical Education Personnel of Universities, Government and aided colleges under the control of Department of Higher Education and Government and Aided Law Colleges vide Government order dated 24.12.2009 Annexure-C. Hence, State cannot be now heard to contend that on account of financial stringency it is unable to pay the amounts or on any other ground whatsoever including the ground of such funds is required for developmental works and same cannot be diverted to pay petitioners or similarly placed persons. Infact contentions raised by the State in these writ petitions are similar to the contentions raised by the State of Uttar Pradesh in the above referred case and it came to be rejected as already noticed herein above and said order having been affirmed by Hon''ble Apex Court on 29.07.2013 in SLP (Civil) 15927/2013. Copy of which has been made available by learned counsel appearing for petitioners. Hence, state cannot be permitted to take umbrage to stave off its liability or postpone the payment. Also in view of the fact that similarly placed person who had approached this court in W.P. 15175/2009 having been paid through cheque during the pendency of the contempt proceedings petitioners cannot be deprived of their right to claim payment of arrears. Hence, respondents 1 to 3 and 5, cannot shirk from its responsibility of making payment to the petitioners herein. In that view of the matter I proceed to pass the following:

ORDER

"(i) A writ of Mandamus is issued to the respondents 1 to 3 and 5 to pay arrears of salary and other emoluments as per revised pay scale to which the petitioners would be entitled to for the period 01.01.2006 to 23.12.2009 within three months from the date of receipt of copy of this order and on failure to make such payment petitioners would be entitled to interest@ 8% p.a.

(ii) It is needless to state that on the request made by the State Government after payment, for releasing 80% of the contribution payable by the Central Government and on such request being received within three months thereof, the Central Government shall release the said amount as per the provisions of the scheme."

Ordered accordingly.