DR. K. M. SHARMA & ORS. versus THE STATE OF CHHATTISGARH & ORS. on 20 May 2022

1. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgmentand order passed by the High Court of Chhattisgarh at Bilaspur in WritAppeal No. 538 of 2015 by which the High Court has dismissed the saidappeal and has not interfered with the judgment and order passed by thelearned Single Judge dismissing the writ petition in which the appellants– original writ petitioners prayed for grant of equal pay-scale as admissibleto teachers appointed in the Municipal services under the MunicipalEmployees (Recruitment and Conditions of Service) Rules, 1968(hereinafter referred to as “Rules, 1968”), the original writ petitioners –Shiksha Karmis have preferred the present appeal.

2. At the outset, it is required to be noted that respective petitionerswere appointed as Shikha Karmis under the Chhattisgarh Municipalities A

B

C

D

E

F

G

H

AShiksha Karmis (Recruitment and Conditions of Service) Rules, 1998(hereinafter referred to the “Shiksha Karmis Rules, 1998”). The ShikshaKarmis Rules, 1998 were subsequently substituted by the ChhattisgarhShiksha (Nagriya Nikay) Samvarg (Bharti Tatha Sewa Ki Sharte) Niyam,2013. That the original writ petitioners submitted representations prayingfor grant of equal pay-scale as admissible to teachers appointed inBMunicipal services, which came to be rejected. The respective appellantsfiled the writ petition before the High Court. The Learned Single Judgedismissed the said writ petition. The appellants - original writ petitionerspreferred writ appeal before the Division Bench of the High Court. Bythe impugned judgment and order, the Division Bench of the High CourtChas dismissed the said appeal, hence the present appeal has been filedby the appellants – original writ petitioners – Shiksha Karmis.

3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellants – originalwrit petitioners has submitted that the respective appellants are servingas teachers. That they are the persons, who were appointed in the yearD1998 under the Shiksha Karmis Rules, 1998 to teach in the schools underthe control of the respondent Municipality. It is submitted that they arenot the persons whose nature of appointment was ever in the form andmanner of contract employees.

3.1 It is submitted that as per Rule 7 of the Shiksha Karmis Rules,E1998, the probation period for a Shiksha Karmi would be for 3 to 5years. That after the probation period is over and the respective ShikshaKarmis are confirmed as per Rule 7, they are entitled to “regular pay-scale” as applicable to Municipality teachers from the date ofappointment. It is submitted that in the present case, the respective ShikshaKarmis were appointed under Rule 5 and were confirmed in the yearF2001 after completion of their probation period. It is contended thattherefore, they are entitled to the “regular pay-scale”, which is beingpaid to the Municipality Teachers, as per the mandate of Rule 7 of theShiksha Karmis Rules, 1998.

3.2 It is urged by learned counsel appearing on behalf of theGappellants that though the Shiksha Karmis and the teachers appointedby the Municipality under the Rules, 1968 are performing the same/similar duties, as per the 7[th] Pay Commission recommendation, they areput in the pay-scale of Rs.9300-34800/- for Grade I Class 9 to 12, againstwhich the Municipality teachers are given 3% increment every year onHthe pay-scale of Rs.9300-34800/-.

It is submitted that the Municipality teachers are also getting HRA/DA/SA/Medical/Old Pension Scheme/GPF/Ex-Gratia/Every 10 YearPromotion. However, so far as the Shiksha Karmis are concerned, nosuch benefits are given to them. It is submitted that when the ShikshaKarmis are performing the same kind of work; teaching the similar class;having similar educational qualification; similar syllabus; similar EducationBoard and under the same controlling authority, not being paid the samepay-scale as being paid to the teachers of the Municipality isdiscriminatory and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India.

3.3 Relying upon Rule 11 of the Shiksha Karmis Rules, 1998, it isfurther submitted that as conditions of services of Shiksha Karmis arethe same as applicable to other employees of the Municipality therefore,the Shiksha Karmis are also entitled to the same pay-scale which isadmissible to the other employees of the Municipality/Municipal teachers.

3.4 Making the above submissions, it is prayed that the appellantsare entitled to the same pay-scale, which is made available to the teachersof the Municipality.

4. While opposing the present appeal, learned counsel appearingon behalf of the respondents have vehemently submitted that theappellants are appointed as Shiksha Karmis under the Shiksha KarmisRules, 1998 and therefore, they are being governed under the said Rules.It is submitted that so far as the teachers working in the Municipalitiesare concerned, they are appointed under the Rules, 1968 and thereforethey are governed by the Rules, 1968. It is submitted that the appellantsare being paid the pay-scales as provided under Rule 4 of the ShikshaKarmis Rules, 1998.

4.1 It is contended that submission on behalf of the appellants -original writ petitioners that on completion of the probation period asprovided under Rule 7, they are entitled to the pay-scale as available tothe Municipality teachers is concerned, the same is on a mis-readingand/or mis-interpretation of Rule 7. It is submitted that on completion ofthe probation period, their services are confirmed as Shiksha Karmisonly and not as Municipal teachers.

4.2 It is urged that the pay-scales of Shiksha Karmis have beenprescribed under Rule 4 of the Shiksha Karmis Rules, 1998 and they arebeing paid by the Municipality as per the pay-scales provided underSchedule I of the said Rules.

AB

C

D

E

F

G

H

A4.3 It is submitted that so far as reliance being placed upon Rule11 of the Shiksha Karmis Rules, 1998 is concerned, Rule 11 is only withrespect to general conditions of services other than those mentioned inthe Rules. It is submitted that Rule 11 of the Shiksha Karmis Rules, 1998clearly states that conditions of services other than those mentioned inthe said Rules will be the same as applicable to the other employees ofBthe Municipality. That other conditions of service as per Rule 11 meansthat the Shiksha Karmis will have parity with regard to leave, age,superannuation, provident fund, disciplinary enquiry, etc., which areotherwise not defined under the Shiksha Karmis Rules, 1998.

A

4.4 Now, so far as the contention on behalf of the appellants thatCthey are entitled to the pay-scales, which may be available to theMunicipal teachers on the principle of equal pay for equal work isconcerned, it is submitted that the Shiksha Karmis and the Municipalteachers are appointed under different Rules and there are differentmethods of selection and recruitment so far as the appointment of ShikshaDKarmis and Municipal Teachers are concerned.

4.5 Relying upon the decision of this Court in the case of State ofHaryana and Ors. Vs. Charanjit Singh and Ors., (2006) 9 SCC321, it is submitted that as the Shiksha Karmis and the MunicipalTeachers are appointed under different Rules and there are differentEmethods of selection and recruitment, the appellants / Shiksha Karmisare not entitled to the pay-scale as admissible to the Municipal teachers,as they are appointed under different Rules.

4.6 Making the above submissions, it is prayed to dismiss thepresent appeal.

F5. We have heard the learned counsel appearing for the respectiveparties at length.

6. The respective appellants, who are/were serving as ShikshaKarmis are claiming parity in the pay-scale with that of the employeesof the Municipality/Municipal teachers. However, it is to be noted thatGShiksha Karmis are appointed under different Rules namely, ShikshaKarmis Rules, 1998 and the Municipal teachers are appointed underdifferent Rules namely, the Rules, 1968. Therefore, all Shiksha Karmisappointed under the Shiksha Karmis Rules, 1998 shall be governed bythe provisions of the said Rules, 1998. Rules, 4, 7 and 11, which arerelevant for our purpose are extracted as under:-H

“4. Classification and Pay Scale- Classification of ShikshaKarmis and their scales of pay shall be as given in the Schedule I.Number of posts shall not be increased except with the priorapproval of the Government or an Officer duly authorised by theGovernment.

X X X X

7. Probation - Every person directly recruited to the post ofShiksha Karmi shall be initially appointed on probation of threeyears, extendable up to five years for a particular school so thatthe Shiksha Karmis serves in that school for full probation period.The performance will be assessed by the appointing authority atthe end of each year. After three years, the Shiksha Karmi maybe appointed in the regular pay-scale of the Municipality on thebasis of his work, conduct and performance. In case theperformance is not found satisfactory, he may be allowed tocontinue on the probation for another one to two years to improveafter which his performance will be assessed again at the end ofextended period and if not found satisfactory his services shall beterminated. But in no case the probationary period shall be extendedbeyond that maximum period of five years. Shiksha Karmi will bepaid fixed pay equivalent to minimum of the pay scale withadmissible dearness allowance during the probation period.

X X X X

11. General conditions of Service- Conditions of service otherthan mentioned above, shall be the same as applicable to the otheremployees of the Municipality.”

7. Heavy reliance is placed on Rule 7 and it is the case on behalfof the appellants that after completion of the probation period asmentioned in Rule 7, Shiksha Karmis will have to be paid the payequivalent to the pay-scale of the Municipal teachers. The aforesaidsubmission has no substance. On a fair reading of Rule 7, it is clear thaton completion of the probation period, the Shiksha Karmis shall beconfirmed as Shiksha Karmis only and they shall be put in the regularpay-scale of the Municipality as Shiksha Karmis and not as the Municipalteachers. As observed hereinabove, Municipal teachers are appointedunder the Rules, 1968. As per Rule 4 of the Shiksha Karmis Rules, 1998,Shiksha Karmis shall have to be paid the scales of pay as given in the A

B

CDE

F

G

H

ASchedule I to the aforesaid Rules. The respective Shiksha Karmis arepaid the pay-scales as per Schedule I of Rule 4. Therefore, when theMunicipal teachers and the Shiksha Karmis are appointed under differentRules and there are different methods of selection and recruitment, aShiksha Karmi cannot claim parity in pay-scale with that of Municipalteachers on the principle of equal pay for equal work. Therefore, it isBobserved and held that Shiksha Karmis, who are governed by the ShikshaKarmis Rules, 1998 under which they were appointed, are entitled topay-scales under the Shiksha Karmis Rules, 1998 only, which are beingpaid to them.

8. In view of the above, no error has been committed either byCthe learned Single Judge or by the Division Bench in refusing to grantthe pay-scales of Municipal teachers to the appellants herein beingShiksha Karmis. We are in complete agreement with the view taken bythe High Court.

9. In view of the above discussion and for the reasons statedDabove, present appeal fails and the same deserves to be dismissed and isaccordingly dismissed. However, in the facts and circumstances of thecase, there shall be no order as to costs.

E

Nidhi Jain

(Assisted by : Shashwat Jain, LCRA)

Appeal dismissed.

F

G

H