JUDGEMENT
S.P. Goyal, J. -
(1.) Respondent Smt. Balbir Kaur, was employed as Classical and Vernacular Teacher in Government Girls Higher Secondary School, Patiala and was in the selection grade of Rs. 140-10-200. This selection grade was revised to Rs. 220-8-300-10-400 with effect from Nov. 1, 1966 on the recommendation of the Kothari Commission by the Government. This selection grade was admissible to 15 per cent of the total strength of the teachers. As there was some doubt regarding the admissibility of this grade, the Director, Public Instruction on enquiry from District Education Officer clarified the matter vide Annexure P - 6, dated 249-1968/28-10-1968 wherein it was stated that the selection grade would be admissible to the teachers who were already enjoying the earlier selection grade of Rs. 140 - 200. The District Education Officer, Patiala, however, declined the request of the plaintiff to grant her revised selection grade on the ground that 15 per cent strength has to be calculated district - wise. Consequently, the respondent filed this suit for a declaration that she was entitled to the revised grade and for arrears of pay in accordance therewith. The suit was decreed by the trial Court and its judgment was upheld on appeal by the learned Additional District Judge, Patiala, vide judgment dated Aug. 2, 1971. Still dissatisfied, the State has come up in this second appeal.
(2.) The learned counsel for the State has challenged the impugned decree on the sole ground that the interpretation of letter; Exhibit P - 6 by the Courts below cannot be sustained and that the selection grade according to that letter is admissible only to the 15 per cent of the total strength of teachers district - wise. I am unable to agree with the contention of the learned counsel. A bare reading of the letter shows that the revised scale was admissible to all classical and vernacular teachers who were already enjoying selection grade of Rs. 140 - 220. The Court below, therefore, rightly rejected the defence and decreed the suit.
(3.) This appeal, therefore, has no merit and is accordingly dismissed with costs. Appeal dismissed.;
Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.