- (1.) Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned counsel for the respondents. The petitioners by way of filing the above mentioned two petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution of India have prayed for quashing/setting aside the office order as contained in Memo No. 07/Sahebganj dated 4.1.2006 passed by the District Superintendent of Education, Sahebganj; whereby, the pay scale of the petitioners have been reduced from 4500-7000/5000-8000 to 3050-4590, i.e. in the initial pay scale drawn by a teacher in primary school.
(2.) The shorts facts of the case are as under:- A. That the petitioners were appointed prior to 1988 on the post of teachers in Primary/Middle School. All the petitioners completed their teachers' training from David Hare College of correspondence, Kolkatta between January 198.3 to April 1991. The certificate of Teachers' Training granted by David Hare College of Correspondence, Kolkata goes under consideration before the Hon'ble Patna High Court in case of Md. Halim and Others Vs. State of Bihar and Ors.,1985 PLJR 709 in CWJC 8829/89 and by order dated 18.12.1997 the Hon'ble Patna High Court taking into consideration the Division Bench decision held that the persons who got their teachers' training from David Hare College of correspondence, Kolkata will be entitled for being appointed on the post of Assistant trained Teachers. B. Accordingly, the petitioners made representation before the District Superintendent of Education, Sahibganj to the effect that since they are trained teachers and they should be granted higher pay scale of trained teachers. In pursuance thereto, the District Superintendent of Education, Sahibganj by letter dated 27.7.1998 requested the Director, Primary Education, Bihar Patna to give necessary guideline in respect of grant of higher pay scale to the petitioners and other similarly situated persons. The petitioners and others again made representation dated 7.1.1991 requesting the District Superintendent of Education, Sahibganj to grant trained teachers' pay scale in view of ratio laid down in CWJC No. 8829/1989. Thereafter, said order dated 18.12.97 passed in CWJC No. 8829/1989 complied with by office order as contained in Memo No. 89 dated 18.1.1999. Thereafter, the District Superintendent of Education, Sahibganj by letter No. 115 dated 27.1.1999 requested the Principal David Hare College of Correspondence, Kolkata to verify the certificate with respect to teacher training received by the petitioners. In pursuance thereof, the Principal of the said college after verification reported to the District Superintendent of Education, Sahibganj to the date of publication of result submitted on 17.2.99. Thereafter, the District Superintendent of Education Sahibganj by office order as contained in Memo No. 208 dated 12.5.99 taking into consideration the said judgment passed in case of Md. Halim rendered on 18.12.1997 as also the verification of certificate dated 17.2.99 given by he Principal of David Hare College granted the higher pay scale to all the petitioners. Thereafter, the pay scale of the petitioners was reduced and they were getting the reduced pay scale of Rs. 3050-4590. Thereafter, the State of Jharkhand was created on 15.11.2000. C. By letter no. 404 dated 16.2.2004 the Govt, of Jharkhand directed all the Dy. Commissioners /R.D.D.Es. and District Superintendents of Educations to examine the validity and genuineness with respect to the certificate granted by one or other training institutes located in different part of the country. The issue of genuineness of certificates granted by one or other training institute located in different parts of the country fell for consideration before this Court in LPA No. 235/04 (Dilip Kr. Gupta & Ors. Vs. State of Jharkhand an Ors.) and its analogous cases, which was decided on 30.3.2005. Thereafter, the District Superintendent of Education Sahibganj by its letter No. 780 dated 18.6.05 sought for certain clarification with respect to teachers who got their training from David Hare College of Correspondence. Kolkata. In pursuance to the said letter, the Director, Primary Education, Govt, of Jharkhand directed the District Superintendent of Education, Sahibganj that he should take into consideration the judgment rendered in LPA No. 235 of 2004. Thereafter, the District Superintendent of Education, Sahibganj by the impugned office order as contained in Memo No. 07 dated 4.1.2006 giving reference to the order dated 30.3.2005 passed by this Court in LPA No. 235/04 and letter no. 404 dated 16.2.2004 issued by the Govt, of Jharkhand has reduced the pay scale of the petitioner from 4500-7000/5000- 8000 to Rs. 3050-4590. Thereafter, immediately, the petitioners submitted representation dated 15.4.2006 to the Director Primary Education. Jharkhand containing therein that the action of the respondent to reduce the pay scale of the petitioners was totally unjustified. Learned counsel for the petitioners further submitted that the order impugned passed by respondent authorities is wholly illegal, arbitrary, without jurisdiction and unconstitutional. It is further submitted that the National Council of Teachers Education (for short NCTE) came into effect on 17.8.1995 but the petitioners got their teachers training much prior to the date when the NCTE came into effect. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the respondent District Superintendent of Education, Sahibganj has referred the decision of this Court dated 30.3.2005 passed in LPA No. 235/2004 and its analogous cases in this context, is not at all relevant with respect to the petitioners. It is submitted that there is nothing in the said judgment with respect to appointments made prior to 17.8.95 and the letter and the direction also have got no concern with respect to the service career of the petitioners who were appointed in 1988 or prior thereto. It is further stated that the petitioners got their training from David Hare College of Correspondence, Kolkata prior to 17.8.95 and therefore, there is no question of reducing the pay scale of the petitioners of any count thereof. D. It is further stated that before issuance of impugned office order dated 4.1.2006 no opportunity of hearing was ever given to the petitioners and they were not asked with show cause notice which is basic requirement to be followed for the observance of the principle of natural justice as the impugned order amounts to punishment because the petitioners were getting the pay scale of Rs. 4500-7000/5000-8000 but their pay scales have been reduced to the initial pay scale i.e. Rs. 3050-4590. Learned counsel for the petitioners has referred to and relied upon the order passed in CWJC No. 8829/89 and also the judgment Md. Halim and Others Vs. State of Bihar and Ors.,1985 PLJR 709 which has been referred to and relied upon in CWJC No. 8829/89. Learned counsel for the petitioners has also referred to and relied upon the judgment reported in 2002 2 JCR 293, 2007 1 JCR 323, STATE OF JHARKHAND AND ORS V/S SARBANI BOSE AND ANR, 2007 1 JCR 578, KALPANA LODHIYA V/S STATE OF JHARKHAND, 2009 1 JCR 332and 2010 3 JCR 565 and submitted that the case of the present petitioners is identical than that of the petitioners of above referred cases; therefore, the order impugned dated 4.1.2006 passed by the respondent authorities may be quashed and set aside.
(3.) The respondent No. 5 has filed counter affidavit stating inter alia that the petitioners and others have obtained their teachers' training certificate from an unrecognized institution namely David Hare College of Correspondence, Kolkata. The Government of Bihar published a notification in which a Bihar Taken Over Elementary School Teachers' Promotion Rules, 1993 came into effect retrospectively from January 1986 and the petitioners of these petitions obtained certificate in the year 1987-88 of teachers training which was not recognized institute from the UGC or the State Government. In Clause 13(i) of the aforesaid notification (gazette) of promotion Rule, 1993 it is clearly mentioned and directed that an untrained teachers shall not be eligible for promotion to any of the grade. It is further submitted that the writ petitioners have been appointed in the year 1988 and some of them have been reappointed in the year 1995 and 1997 and they obtained teachers training certificate in the year 1987-88 and the Promotion Rule 1993 notified in the year 1993 but it has been made effective retrospectively from 1986 and thereafter a National Council for Teachers Education Act, 1993 has came into force. It is submitted that David Hare College of correspondence, Kolkata and eight others institutions of Kolkata have not been recognized by the NCTE Act, 1995. However, the then District Superintendent of Education, Sahibganj by ignoring the Promotion Rules 1993 and the NCTE Act, 1993 illegally and irregularly granted trained scale to the writ petitioners vide Memo No. 208 dated 12.5.99. The Secretary, Human Resources Development Department, Jharkhand also provided the guideline regarding the matter of teachers training institution and issued memo dated 16.2.2004. It is further submitted that this Court in LPA No. 235/2004 by order dated 30.3.2005 made certain observations regarding non-recognized institute and certificate issued by such institute while passing the order. It is submitted that the Hon'ble court also observed while passing the order in LPA No. 235/2004 that there is nothing on record to suggest that any of the institute of teachers training is either recognized by any of the State Government such as State of West Bengal or State of Bihar or State of Jharkhand or Central Government or any of the Statutory Body /institute or affiliated with any University. It is further submitted that therefore, those who have obtained such certificate of Sr. teacher's training course can not claim their appointment in terms of Recruitment Rules, 2002, read with Teachers Training Qualification laid down in the advertisement published by the JPSC in August' 2002. It is further submitted that certificate obtained by the petitioners of teachers training from unrecognized institution can not be called authentic and on that basis, the petitioners were illegally obtained trained scale between January 1983 to April 1991 and when it came to the knowledge of the authority, the authority concerned rightly reduced the trained pay scale of the petitioners as they are not entitled to the said pay scale and issued Memo No. 7 dated 4.1.2006.;