HEMLATA HANMANTRAO TARATE AND OTHERS v. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH PRINCIPAL SECRETARY AND OTHERS AND
Case Details
2024:BHC-AUG:12537-DB ( 1 ) 920 wp 6184.24 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD 920 WRIT PETITION NO. 6184 OF 2024 HEMLATA HANMANTRAO TARATE AND OTHERS VERSUS THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH PRINCIPAL SECRETARY AND OTHERS AND 944 WRIT PETITION NO. 6245 OF 2024 SHITAL SACHHIDANAND BODHALE AND OTHERS VERSUS THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH PRINCIPAL SECRETARY AND OTHERS AND 1 WRIT PETITION NO. 6349 OF 2024 SUMAN BANSIDHAR JOGDAND AND OTHERS VERSUS THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH THE SECRETARY AND OTHERS AND 2 WRIT PETITION NO. 6350 OF 2024 PRACHITA UTTAMRAO JADHAV VERSUS THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH PRINCIPAL SECRETARY AND OTHERS AND 3 WRIT PETITION NO. 6351 OF 2024 ASHOK ANANTRAO JOGDAND AND OTHERS VERSUS THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH THE SECRETARY AND OTHERS ( 2 ) 920 wp 6184.24 AND 4 WRIT PETITION NO. 6352 OF 2024 VINOD PRAHLADRAO SOLANKE AND OTHERS VERSUS THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH PRINCIPAL SECRETARY AND OTHERS AND 5 WRIT PETITION NO. 6353 OF 2024 SHAIKH AINODDIN BASHIRODDIN AND ANOTHER VERSUS THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH PRINCIPAL SECRETARY AND OTHERS
Legal Reasoning
There is no dispute that all these Petitioners are graduate trained teachers and all of them have been granted the pay scale of the graduate teacher long ago, which has been altered by the impugned order. ( 4 ) 920 wp 6184.24 4. It is undisputed that, prior to the introduction of the Government Resolution dated 13.10.2016, all the graduate trained teachers have been granted the pay scale of the graduate trained teacher. It is equally undisputed that, by Government Resolution dated 11.08.1999, the State Government resolved to pay the salary scale available to a graduate trained teacher. For brevity, if there are 4 graduate trained teachers in the subject of Geology, the senior most teacher would be eligible for the pay scale of a graduate trained teacher, which would be 25% of the available strength of eligible teachers. However, in several cases, every graduate trained teacher was extended the said scale. By the Government Resolution dated 13.10.2016, the proportion of 25% of the senior most graduate teacher in the subject being eligible for the pay scale commensurate to the position held, was altered and the new proportion of 1/3rd was made applicable. For brevity, if the subject Geography has 3 teachers, 1/3rd meaning 33 1/3rd % of the teachers would be eligible for the pay scale. If there are 6 teachers, 2 would get pay scale of the graduate trained teachers. If there are 9 teachers in Geography, who are graduate trained teachers, 3 senior most teachers would get the pay scale. 5. The grievance of these Petitioners is that, all the graduate trained teachers were earlier paid the pay scale commensurate to the posts held by them. This position was not altered until the Government Resolution dated ( 5 ) 920 wp 6184.24 13.10.2016, was introduced. According to the Petitioners, they are further aggrieved by the impugned order, where proportion of 1/3rd teachers as per the seniority/subject-wise, was not followed and the proportion was reduced to 25%. 6. The learned Advocate representing the Zilla Parishad has made a valiant attempt to defend the impugned order. He is supported in his submissions by the learned AGP with equal vehemence. However, when confronted with Clause-3 of the Government Resolution dated 13.10.2016, they fairly submit that the said Government Resolution requires 33% of the senior most graduate trained teachers to be considered for the pay scale, subject-wise,
Arguments
….. Advocate for the Petitioner/s : S/Shri T.M. Tandale, A.V. Rakh, S.A. Nagarsoge, M.K. Deshpande in respective petitions AGPs for Respondents/State: S/Shri R.K. Ingole, N.S. Tekale, B.M. Dhanure, V.M. Kagne, S.J. Salgare and Ms. Neha Kamble Advocate for R/4 in WP/6184/24 & WP/6242/24 : Mr. S.R. Shirsat Advocate for Resp./Z.P. - Beed: Mr. P.D. Suryawanshi Advocate for Respondents : Mr. Copy Served On Gp, No Caveat ….. CORAM : RAVINDRA V. GHUGE & Y.G. KHOBRAGADE, JJ. DATE : 27th June, 2024 P.C. :- 1. Writ Petition Nos. 6349/2024, 6350/2024, 6351/2024, 6352/2024 and 6353/2024, are not on board. Taken on board at the request of the parties. ( 3 ) 920 wp 6184.24 2. The Petitioners claim to be identically placed. They are aggrieved by the impugned orders, one of them being dated 10.06.2022. Prayer clause (B) is reproduced hereunder:- “B] This Hon'ble Court may be pleased to issue appropriate writ, order or direction for quashing and set aside the order bearing No. OW/ZPB/Edu./Pri. Div.1-A No. 2215/2022 dated 10.6.2022 issued by the respondent no. 4 thereby cancelling the primary graduate pay scale of Rs.9300-34800 grade pay Rs. 4300/- vide order dated 27.6.2014 and recovering the said pay from the petitioners and re-fixation of the said pay scale and further it be held that, the petitioners are entitled to draw the primary graduate pay scale of Rs.9300-34800 + grade pay Rs.4300/-, as per the orders dated 27.6.2014 issued by the respondent no.4 with all consequential benefits of continuity of the said pay scale Rs. 38600- 1,22,800/- as per 7th pay, which the petitioners are drawing at present.” 3. The learned Advocate for the Petitioners submits that they have challenged the impugned order as well as the Government Resolution dated 13.10.2016. However, by a further Government Resolution issued on 27.06.2022, a committee has been formed to look into the grievances of the employees like these Petitioners, who are insisting on the implementation of the legal principle in service jurisprudence i.e. “equal pay for equal work”.
Decision
going by their seniority. In view of the above, it is obvious that the impugned order referring to the provision of 25%, instead of the referable Clause-3 of the 2016 Government Resolution of 33 1/3rd %, is unsustainable. 7. The learned AGP and the learned Advocate for the Zilla Parishad, draw our attention to yet another Government Resolution dated 27.06.2022. The Government of Maharashtra has formed a committee. The terms of reference to the committee, are as under:- "२. अभ्यास समि(cid:8)तीची काय(cid:13)क्ቌा iw<hyizek.ks रामि(cid:16)ल:- उ्ሴ izkFkfed देण्या(cid:8)ागील पाኚᮛ(cid:13)भू(cid:8)ी, शि(cid:24)्ቌकांना पदवीधर osruJs.kh सदर शि(cid:24)्ቌकांच्या (cid:24)े्ቌशि%क / व्यावसायियक स्तरावरील २५% ( 6 ) 920 wp 6184.24 अ(cid:16)(cid:13)ते(cid:8)ध्ये कालोघात झालेले बदल, पदवीधर osruJs.kh ljldV भार ड. शि(cid:24)फारस कर%े. तत्संबंधाने सदर शि(cid:24)्ቌकांना त्या(cid:8)ुळे पड%ारा आቕኌ3क अनुषंमिगक सव(cid:13) (cid:8)ु्ቕांचा सव6कष अभ्यास करून (cid:24)ासनास देण्याची (cid:8)ाग%ी, ३. या (cid:24)ासन मिन%(cid:13)यान्वये गठीत करण्यात आलेल्या अभ्या(cid:8) समि(cid:8)तीने उपरो्ሹ न(cid:8)ूद बाबींच्या अनुषंगाने तीन (cid:8)मि(cid:16)न्यात अ(cid:16)वाल (cid:24)ासनास सादर करावा. ४. अध्य्ቌ, (cid:24)ासमिकय / अभ्यास समि(cid:8)ती आवश्यकतेनुसार सदर समि(cid:8)तीवर अ(cid:24)ासमिकय सदस्यांना vkea=hr करू (cid:24)कतील." 8. It is obvious that the above stated committee had to submit a report within three months from the date of it's constitution. There is no dispute that the committee is in place. 9. In view of the above, the Writ Petitions are partly allowed. The impugned order is quashed and set aside. 10. We expect the said Committee constituted under the Government Resolution dated 27.06.2022, to submit its recommendations to the Government, before 15.08.2024. The position existing prior to the issuance of the impugned order, is restored. However, being conscious of the fact that a committee has been constituted by the Government Resolution dated 27.06.2022, any further decision of the authorities would be subject to the recommendations of the committee, if accepted and implemented by the State Government. ( 7 ) 920 wp 6184.24 11. In view of the delay and laches, the learned Advocate for the Petitioners submits that each of these Petitioners would deposit an amount of Rs.500/- as donation to the Advocates’ Association of Bombay High Court, Bench at Aurangabad, within 30 days. [Y.G. KHOBRAGADE, J.] [RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, J.] mub