Full Judgment Text
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 2
PETITIONER:
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS.
Vs.
RESPONDENT:
DR. SHRI HARI SHANKAR VAIDHYA & ORS.
DATE OF JUDGMENT: 07/04/1997
BENCH:
K. RAMASWAMY, D.P. WADHWA
ACT:
HEADNOTE:
JUDGMENT:
O R D E R
Leave granted. We have heard learned counsel on both
sides.
These appeals by special leave arise from the judgment
of the Division Bench of the Bombay High Court, made on June
14, 1996 in writ Petition No.3508/92 and writ Petition
No.2645/90.
The admitted position is that respondents are the
teachers working in Ayurvedic, Unani and Homeopathic
private aided educational institutions. One of the
questions which requires examination is: whether they are
eligible for pension and gratuity scheme on par with state
Government Civil servants under the Maharashtra state
Government civil service (Pension) Rules, 1982 (for short,
the ’Rules’). Admittedly, per se, the Rules do not apply
to them. Pursuant to the recommendation made by UGC , the
Government of Maharashtra by its Resolution dated may 26,
1981 have adopted the uniform pay-scales being paid to the
non-teaching staff and teachers working in aided
educational institution, i.e. Ayurvedic, Unani and
Homeopathic colleges, BY another Resolution dated July 29,
1983, they extended the benefit to the non-Government
organisation on par with the Government organisations.
since the Government have not extended the benefit of
pension and gratuity scheme, a writ petition was filed in
the High court in that behalf. The High court has disposed
it of in the impugned order. Thus, these appeals by
special leave.
As regards the grant-in-aid, this is not in controversy
and, therefore, we need not go into the question. The only
question is: whether the respondents are entitled to the
pension and gratuity on par with Government servants ? Shri
Mohita, learned senior counsel appearing for the state, has
contended that in view of the huge financial outlay, the
Government has been, in a phased manner, extending the
benefits from time to time and, therefore, the direction
cannot be given to tide down the hands of the Government to
extend all the benefits to all of them at a stretch. Shri
D.A. Dave, learned senior counsel for the respondents, on
the other hands, has contended that when the grant-in-aid
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 2
and the pension were not being extended to the teachers
working in the private law colleges, the High Court has
given direction to extend the benefit which was affirmed by
this court in state of Maharashtra V. Manubhai Pragaji Vashi
& Ors. [(1995) 5 SCC 730]. Therefore, the same benefit may
be extended to them. He also cited state of H.P.. v. H.P..
State Recognised & Aided Schools Managing Committees & ors.
[(1995) 4 SCC 507] wherein this court has directed to extend
grant-in-aid to the private educational institutions.,
middle-class and lower middle-class aided schools.
In view of the respective contentions, the only
question that arises for consideration is: whether the High
Court would be justified to grant the pension and gratuity
scheme to the teachers working in the Ayurvedic, Unani and
Homeopathic aided institution issued by this court, the
pension and gratuity scheme were extended to the Law College
from 1995. Whether the scheme could be extended or not is a
question of an executive policy and the Court would not take
the responsibility of directing the Government to extend the
policy. Court requires examination as to extend the policy.
Court requires examination as to how the policy laid down is
being worked out . It is stated that since huge financial
outlay is involved in extending the benefits and the
Government is not intending to deny the benefit to the
segment of the teachers, we appreciate the stand taken by
the Government. The Government is, therefore, directed to
consider extension of the benefit of pension and gratuity
scheme to the teachers working in the Ayurvedic, Unani and
Homeopathic aided educational institution in a phased
manner, as was done with respected to the other aided
institution.
The appeals are, accordingly, disposed of. No costs.