- (1.)Of the above batch of appeals before us, C. A. Nos. 8334-8353 of 2001 have been filed by the state of Karnataka and respondent teachers have also filed independently separate C. A. Nos. 8355-57/ 2001 and 8358-8374 of 2001, aggrieved against the respective portions of the judgment of the division bench of the High court of Karnataka dated 30-05-1998 in writ appeal nos. 528-546 of 1996 etc. , writ petitions had been filed before the High court of Karnataka seeking for the quashing of the circular dated 14-01-1992 issued by the regional deputy director of collegiate education, Mysore and for a consequential direction in the nature of mandamus directing the authorities of the state to implement the Go No. ED 88 UNI 88 Bangalore dated 30-03-1990.
(2.)The real controversy centres around a narrow compass. In the state of karnataka, having regard to the pattern of education in vogue with the implementation of system of education 10+2+3, three types of colleges came into function, firstly, colleges in which exclusively pre-university courses alone were taught; secondly, colleges in which exclusively degree courses alone were taught and composite colleges, as it is called wherein both the pre-university as well as degree courses also were taught, and also called as first grade colleges. When the government passed the orders dated 30-03-1990 extending the benefits of revised 1986 University Grants Commission (for short the UGC) pay scales to the teachers in the first grade (degree) colleges both government colleges and those aided by government as per grant-in-aid code under the control of the directorate of collegiate education, various guidelines and stipulations were issued therein for the purpose of extending the scales of pay in terms of the 4th plan pay scales of ugc. The said order itself seems to have been passed as an aftermath of the representations made by the college teachers and the recommendations of the committee set up therefor, after considering such recommendations as well as the orders of the government of India, agreeing to extend its assistance for implementing the scheme of revision of pay scales. This order was said to have been made in suppression of the earlier government order dated 25-03-1989 and for sanctioning revised 1986 UGC scales to the teachers in the first grade degree colleges of the class or category notified above with effect from 1-1-1986. The ugc scheme was stated to be a composite scheme, embracing within its fold not only the university teachers but also the teaching staff of the colleges. Under the caption 'coverage' the order stated as follows:
" (1) Coverage: The scheme applies to teachers in all the first grade (degree) colleges both government aided and government colleges under the directorate of collegiate education. This scheme shall, however, not apply to those who specifically exercise an option in writing to remain out of it. All teachers appointed after the date from which the scheme has been given effect to will be governed by the provisions of the scheme. "

(3.)In the course of implementation of the said orders certain difficulties seems to have surfaced and as noticed earlier the regional deputy director, (collegiate education department, Mysore) in his circular dated 14-1-1992 while inviting the proforma and proposals for implementing the orders of the government indicated that no proposals need be sent in respect of lecturers teaching pre-university classes only and this gave rise to the litigation culminating in the appeals now before us.