Aparesh Kumar Singh, J. - (1.) HEARD learned counsel for the parties. These petitioners had earlier approached this Court in W.P.(S) No. 6933 of 2007 with a prayer to direct the respondents to pay the Matric Trained Senior pay Scale of Rs. 5000 -150 -8000/ - which was being paid to the juniors according to the selection merit list with all arrears on account of such difference of salary.
(2.) THESE petitioners were graduate trained and were appointed as Assistant Teachers in Primary School, Godda as Matric Untrained Teachers. It was their grievance that the District Superintendent of Education, Godda by his order contained in Memo No. 1329 dated 21st June, 2007 had allowed Matric Trained Senior Pay Scale to the persons, who were juniors to the petitioners. They also claimed benefits of 5th Pay Revision, which was not being given to them. The said writ petition was however disposed of by giving liberty to the petitioner to raise their grievances through fresh representation before District Superintendent of Education, Godda who was in turn directed to dispose of the same within the stipulated time vide judgment dated 7th August, 2008 (Annexure -8). By the impugned order Annexure -9 dated 3rd December, 2008, the District Superintendent of Education, Godda has however rejected their representation on the ground that these petitioners had obtained training after their appointment, in the year 1994 but had been granted Matric Trained Scale from the date of their appointment. In view of Primary Teachers Promotion Rules 1993, the incumbent teachers are entitled for promotion only after completion of a particular period in Grade -I after obtaining their training. Since these petitioners have obtained training subsequently, till the date they acquired training they were in Grade -I only. After such training they have not completed 12 years in Grade -I to be promoted to Grade -II. Therefore the question of promotion to Grade -IV does not arise. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner the same issue was under consideration before learned Single Bench of this Court in W.P.(S) No. 638 of 2005, in which it was held that the said petitioners' case should be considered for fixing their seniority from the date of their appointment. They should also be considered for giving benefit of Grade -IV after completion of 8/12 years of their service. The said writ petition was disposed of in terms of the decision taken therein to allow the petitioner to approach the Director, Human Resources Development Department (Primary Education), Government of Jharkhand, for passing necessary orders in individual cases of their representations.
(3.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioners submits that the said judgment was however challenged in Letters Patent Appeal along with few other analogous cases by the State of Jharkhand. The Division Bench of this Court vide judgment dated 6th November, 2012, however, upheld the decision rendered by learned Single Judge and the Letters Patent Appeals were dismissed. She further submits that even Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) Nos. 5520 -5522/2013 preferred against the judgment rendered in the said Letters Patent Appeal were dismissed by Hon'ble Supreme Court vide judgment dated 8th March, 2013. The judgment rendered in the L.P.A. and Special Leave to Appeal are annexed as Annexures: 12 and 13 to the I.A. No. 4997 of 2013. In such circumstances, it is submitted that the impugned order cannot be sustained in law and the petitioners are entitled for similar benefits for reckoning their seniority from the date of their initial appointment for the purposes of promotion to the higher grade under the Rules of 1993.;