- (1.) Heard the counsel for the parties.
(2.) Petitioner is seeking the grant of B.A. Trained Scale from the date when he claims to have acquired the said qualification in the year 1976. The petitioner has, however, been granted B.A. Trained Scale w.e.f. 1.1.1987 vide order dated 10.8.1998. He has also claimed the arrears of salary pursuant to the said grant of scale. Petitioner has also claimed for grant of the post of Head Master as per his seniority as he was discharging the duty of acting Head Master.
(3.) The writ petition has been filed in the year 2000 and it is stated that the petitioner has retired on 31.1.2012. The chronology of facts in the present case are long but in order to cut short the controversy, the relevant facts which are important for consideration of the petitioner's case are as follows. In the year 1968 petitioner passed his matriculation and subsequently, completed 2 years teachers training in 1969-71. He is said to have passed the intermediate science examination in the year 1972 and obtained his B.A. Degree in the year 1975. According to him, he was appointed as a Assistant Teacher in matric scale on 1.7.1972. He was granted I.A. Trained status in March, 1973 , however he was not being granted the I.A. Trained Scale. Being aggrieved, he preferred writ petition being C.W.J.C. No. 297 of 1976(R) claiming particular scale, which was disposed of by directing the respondents to consider his representation for the aforesaid grievances. His representation was rejected in May, 1980 against which he preferred another writ petition being C.W.J.C. No. 235 of 1981(R) which was decided on 7.7.1987 by quashing the order of rejection and directing the Director, Primary Education, Government of Bihar to decide the case of the petitioner. The petitioner had also made a claim of seniority viz-a-viz one private respondent being respondent no. 5 in the said case and while disposing of the writ petition, the Director, Primary Education was directed to decide the claim of the petitioner after giving opportunity of hearing to him. On 22.8.1988 the petitioner's claim was rejected vide Annexure-8 by observing that his case would be considered as and when the cases of other persons will be considered. However, petitioner again preferred C.W.J.C. No. 1050 of 1989(R) being aggrieved by non grant of I.A. Trained Scale as also prayer to declare the petitioner as senior to respondent no. 5. The said writ petition was partly allowed vide order dated 11.9.1997 directing the respondents to grant I.A. Trained Scale to petitioner from 2.3.1973. The petitioner has, thereafter, been granted I.A. Trained Scale from the said date vide order dated 24.4.1998. Subsequently, by the order dated 10.8.1998, petitioner has been granted B.A. Trained Scale w.e.f 1.1.1987 only against his claim from the date he acquired his qualification in the year 1975/1976 and also taking into account the seniority in the I.A. Trained Scale. The observation of the High Court in C.W.J.C. No. 235 of 1981(R) have been quoted in the judgment rendered on 11.9.1997 in C.W.J.C. No. 1050 of 1989(R) and are of some consequence to consider the present controversy raised by the petitioner. Para 6 of the said judgment is quoted herein below:- Para 6:- From bare perusal of the judgment passed in C.W.J.C. No. 235/81(R), it is manifest that the claim of the petitioner for payment of I.A. trained scale was considered by this Court in detail and ultimately came to the following findings:- "In view of the fact that the petitioner was given the I.A. trained teacher scale of pay in the year 1973 there cannot be any justification nor Mrs. Pal appearing for the State could justify the necessity for such an order during the pendency of the writ petition, if any, by reason of Annexure-20. In that view of the matter, Annexure-20 is set aside. However, it may be mentioned that the petitioner cannot also claim the scale of pay admissible to B.A. trained teacher as a matter of right from 1976. The crucial date is the date of promotion to that scale of pay by the concerned authorities and not the date when the petitioner acquired the qualification, meaning thereby the date when he became a Graduate in the year 1976. It is now well settled that a teacher is entitled to a higher scale of pay only on the basis of vacancy and after consideration of his qualification and seniority along with other eligible candidates. As noticed above, the petitioner cannot be granted the said reliefs prayed for in this writ petition at this stage. However, the authorities concerned are directed to consider the case of the petitioner as to from which date the petitioner might have become eligible along with other eligible candidates to be considered for being given the scale of pay admissible to a B.A. trained teacher if it is held that he was legally given the trained scale in the year 1973".;