- (1.) SINCE these two appeals arise out of common judgment passed in CWJC No. 1425/98R, they have been heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment.
(2.) THE petitioners, Sanjay Kumar and Barrister Singh were appointed as part time teachers by the Managing Committee of Model English High School, Sindri sometimes in 1990 -91. Since they were working as teachers continuously and regularly without any break and holding classes, they sought regularisation of their services and for that when their representation for regularisation of services was not considered by the Management, the aforementioned writ petition was filed seeking direction for regularisation of their services. During the pendency of the said writ petition the Management took a decision of 23.9.98 not to allow the petitioners to continue in the service in the said school as part time teachers. The writ petition was contested by the respondents by filing counter affidavit stating, inter alia, that the petitioners were never engaged against permanent vacancy, rather, they were allowed to work as part time teachers on consolidated payment. Their further case is that the Corporation is running in huge loss and because of huge financial loss, it was referred to BIFR, in 1992 and was declared sick.
(3.) THE learned single Judge, after considering the rival contentions of the parties firstly held that part time teachers cannot be equated with temporary teachers and, therefore, question of regularisation of their services cannot arise but, at the same time it was also held that there is permanent need for employment of teachers for teaching physics and Economics in classes XI and XII for which Post Graduate qualification is necessary. The relevant portion of the judgment is worth to be quoted hereinbelow: "The Court is given to understand that these two teachers are still taking classes in class XI and XII, in the said school in respect of the subjects in question. But this Court is faced with difficulty that it cannot direct the regularisation of services of these two teachers having regard to the fact that the petitioners were never appointed even on temporary basis by the Managing Committee of the said school. But this Court makes the following things clear: (i) Teaching In class XI and XII of the subjects in question must be done by a teacher having post graduate experience. (ii) The petitioners can be replaced by engaging other part time teachers only if they are suitably qualified like the petitioners having post graduate experience but the petitioners cannot be replaced by graduate teachers. It i's desirable that since the petitioners have been teaching in those classes for all these years and there is nothing against the petitioners as teachers, they should continue teach in those classes as part time teachers and if the management of the said Corporation ever decides to engage regular teachers for class XI and XII of the said school, they must consider the candidature of the petitioners since the petitioners have gained experience for teaching in the said school for so many years." The learned Single Judge further observed: - - "Since the petitioners are taking regular classes and are virtually sharing the same work load as regular teachers, this Court directs that both the petitioners Nos. 1 and 2, should be paid their salary on the regular pay scale of post graduate teachers for those subjects from the date of this judgment, i.e. from the month of October, 1999. So far as their arrears of salary is concerned, the same should also be paid as early as possible preferably within a period of three months from today." ;