Full Judgment Text
REPORTABLE
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPEAL NO. 3030 OF 2022
Dr. K. M. Sharma & Ors. …Appellant(s)
Versus
The State of Chhattisgarh & Ors. …Respondent(s)
J U D G M E N T
M.R. SHAH, J.
1. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment
and order passed by the High Court of Chhattisgarh at Bilaspur in Writ
Appeal No. 538 of 2015 by which the High Court has dismissed the said
appeal and has not interfered with the judgment and order passed by the
learned Single Judge dismissing the writ petition in which the appellants
– original writ petitioners prayed for grant of equal pay-scale as
admissible to teachers appointed in the Municipal services under the
Municipal Employees (Recruitment and Conditions of Service) Rules,
1968 (hereinafter referred to as “Rules, 1968”), the original writ
petitioners – Shiksha Karmis have preferred the present appeal.
Signature Not Verified
Digitally signed by
Jatinder Kaur
Date: 2022.05.20
17:14:33 IST
Reason:
2. At the outset, it is required to be noted that respective petitioners
were appointed as Shikha Karmis under the Chhattisgarh Municipalities
1
Shiksha Karmis (Recruitment and Conditions of Service) Rules, 1998
(hereinafter referred to the “Shiksha Karmis Rules, 1998”). The Shiksha
Karmis Rules, 1998 were subsequently substituted by the Chhattisgarh
Shiksha (Nagriya Nikay) Samvarg (Bharti Tatha Sewa Ki Sharte) Niyam,
2013. That the original writ petitioners submitted representations praying
for grant of equal pay-scale as admissible to teachers appointed in
Municipal services, which came to be rejected. The respective
appellants filed the writ petition before the High Court. The Learned
Single Judge dismissed the said writ petition. The appellants - original
writ petitioners preferred writ appeal before the Division Bench of the
High Court. By the impugned judgment and order, the Division Bench of
the High Court has dismissed the said appeal, hence the present appeal
has been filed by the appellants – original writ petitioners – Shiksha
Karmis.
3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellants – original
writ petitioners has submitted that the respective appellants are serving
as teachers. That they are the persons, who were appointed in the year
1998 under the Shiksha Karmis Rules, 1998 to teach in the schools
under the control of the respondent Municipality. It is submitted that they
are not the persons whose nature of appointment was ever in the form
and manner of contract employees.
2
3.1 It is submitted that as per Rule 7 of the Shiksha Karmis Rules,
1998, the probation period for a Shiksha Karmi would be for 3 to 5 years.
That after the probation period is over and the respective Shiksha
Karmis are confirmed as per Rule 7, they are entitled to “regular pay-
scale” as applicable to Municipality teachers from the date of
appointment. It is submitted that in the present case, the respective
Shiksha Karmis were appointed under Rule 5 and were confirmed in the
year 2001 after completion of their probation period. It is contended that
therefore, they are entitled to the “regular pay-scale”, which is being paid
to the Municipality Teachers, as per the mandate of Rule 7 of the
Shiksha Karmis Rules, 1998.
3.2 It is urged by learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
appellants that though the Shiksha Karmis and the teachers appointed
by the Municipality under the Rules, 1968 are performing the
th
same/similar duties, as per the 7 Pay Commission recommendation,
they are put in the pay-scale of Rs.9300-34800/- for Grade I Class 9 to
12, against which the Municipality teachers are given 3% increment
every year on the pay-scale of Rs.9300-34800/-.
It is submitted that the Municipality teachers are also getting
HRA/DA/SA/Medical/Old Pension Scheme/GPF/Ex-Gratia/Every 10 Year
Promotion. However, so far as the Shiksha Karmis are concerned, no
3
such benefits are given to them. It is submitted that when the Shiksha
Karmis are performing the same kind of work; teaching the similar class;
having similar educational qualification; similar syllabus; similar
Education Board and under the same controlling authority, not being
paid the same pay-scale as being paid to the teachers of the Municipality
is discriminatory and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India.
3.3 Relying upon Rule 11 of the Shiksha Karmis Rules, 1998, it is
further submitted that as conditions of services of Shiksha Karmis are
the same as applicable to other employees of the Municipality therefore,
the Shiksha Karmis are also entitled to the same pay-scale which is
admissible to the other employees of the Municipality/Municipal
teachers.
3.4 Making the above submissions, it is prayed that the appellants are
entitled to the same pay-scale, which is made available to the teachers
of the Municipality.
4. While opposing the present appeal, learned counsel appearing on
behalf of the respondents have vehemently submitted that the appellants
are appointed as Shiksha Karmis under the Shiksha Karmis Rules, 1998
and therefore, they are being governed under the said Rules. It is
submitted that so far as the teachers working in the Municipalities are
4
concerned, they are appointed under the Rules, 1968 and therefore they
are governed by the Rules, 1968. It is submitted that the appellants are
being paid the pay-scales as provided under Rule 4 of the Shiksha
Karmis Rules, 1998.
4.1 It is contended that submission on behalf of the appellants -
original writ petitioners that on completion of the probation period as
provided under Rule 7, they are entitled to the pay-scale as available to
the Municipality teachers is concerned, the same is on a mis-reading
and/or mis-interpretation of Rule 7. It is submitted that on completion of
the probation period, their services are confirmed as Shiksha Karmis
only and not as Municipal teachers.
4.2
It is urged that the pay-scales of Shiksha Karmis have been
prescribed under Rule 4 of the Shiksha Karmis Rules, 1998 and they are
being paid by the Municipality as per the pay-scales provided under
Schedule I of the said Rules.
4.3 It is submitted that so far as reliance being placed upon Rule 11 of
the Shiksha Karmis Rules, 1998 is concerned, Rule 11 is only with
respect to general conditions of services other than those mentioned in
the Rules. It is submitted that Rule 11 of the Shiksha Karmis Rules,
1998 clearly states that conditions of services other than those
mentioned in the said Rules will be the same as applicable to the other
5
employees of the Municipality. That other conditions of service as per
Rule 11 means that the Shiksha Karmis will have parity with regard to
leave, age, superannuation, provident fund, disciplinary enquiry, etc.,
which are otherwise not defined under the Shiksha Karmis Rules, 1998.
4.4
Now, so far as the contention on behalf of the appellants that they
are entitled to the pay-scales, which may be available to the Municipal
teachers on the principle of equal pay for equal work is concerned, it is
submitted that the Shiksha Karmis and the Municipal teachers are
appointed under different Rules and there are different methods of
selection and recruitment so far as the appointment of Shiksha Karmis
and Municipal Teachers are concerned.
4.5 Relying upon the decision of this Court in the case of State of
Haryana and Ors. Vs. Charanjit Singh and Ors., (2006) 9 SCC 321 , it
is submitted that as the Shiksha Karmis and the Municipal Teachers are
appointed under different Rules and there are different methods of
selection and recruitment, the appellants / Shiksha Karmis are not
entitled to the pay-scale as admissible to the Municipal teachers, as they
are appointed under different Rules.
4.6 Making the above submissions, it is prayed to dismiss the present
appeal.
6
5. We have heard the learned counsel appearing for the respective
parties at length.
6. The respective appellants, who are/were serving as Shiksha
Karmis are claiming parity in the pay-scale with that of the employees of
the Municipality/Municipal teachers. However, it is to be noted that
Shiksha Karmis are appointed under different Rules namely, Shiksha
Karmis Rules, 1998 and the Municipal teachers are appointed under
different Rules namely, the Rules, 1968. Therefore, all Shiksha Karmis
appointed under the Shiksha Karmis Rules, 1998 shall be governed by
the provisions of the said Rules, 1998. Rules, 4, 7 and 11, which are
relevant for our purpose are extracted as under:-
“ 4. Classification and Pay Scale - Classification of
Shiksha Karmis and their scales of pay shall be as given
in the Schedule I. Number of posts shall not be increased
except with the prior approval of the Government or an
Officer duly authorised by the Government.
X X X X
7. Probation - Every person directly recruited to the post
of Shiksha Karmi shall be initially appointed on probation
of three years, extendable up to five years for a particular
school so that the Shiksha Karmis serves in that school
for full probation period. The performance will be
assessed by the appointing authority at the end of each
year. After three years, the Shiksha Karmi may be
appointed in the regular pay-scale of the Municipality on
the basis of his work, conduct and performance. In case
the performance is not found satisfactory, he may be
7
allowed to continue on the probation for another one to
two years to improve after which his performance will be
assessed again at the end of extended period and if not
found satisfactory his services shall be terminated. But in
no case the probationary period shall be extended
beyond that maximum period of five years. Shiksha Karmi
will be paid fixed pay equivalent to minimum of the pay
scale with admissible dearness allowance during the
probation period.
X X X X
11. General conditions of Service- Conditions of
service other than mentioned above, shall be the same as
applicable to the other employees of the Municipality.”
7. Heavy reliance is placed on Rule 7 and it is the case on behalf of
the appellants that after completion of the probation period as mentioned
in Rule 7, Shiksha Karmis will have to be paid the pay equivalent to the
pay-scale of the Municipal teachers. The aforesaid submission has no
substance. On a fair reading of Rule 7, it is clear that on completion of
the probation period, the Shiksha Karmis shall be confirmed as Shiksha
Karmis only and they shall be put in the regular pay-scale of the
Municipality as Shiksha Karmis and not as the Municipal teachers. As
observed hereinabove, Municipal teachers are appointed under the
Rules, 1968. As per Rule 4 of the Shiksha Karmis Rules, 1998, Shiksha
Karmis shall have to be paid the scales of pay as given in the Schedule I
to the aforesaid Rules. The respective Shiksha Karmis are paid the pay-
scales as per Schedule I of Rule 4. Therefore, when the Municipal
8
teachers and the Shiksha Karmis are appointed under different Rules
and there are different methods of selection and recruitment, a Shiksha
Karmi cannot claim parity in pay-scale with that of Municipal teachers on
the principle of equal pay for equal work. Therefore, it is observed and
held that Shiksha Karmis, who are governed by the Shiksha Karmis
Rules, 1998 under which they were appointed, are entitled to pay-scales
under the Shiksha Karmis Rules, 1998 only, which are being paid to
them.
8. In view of the above, no error has been committed either by the
learned Single Judge or by the Division Bench in refusing to grant the
pay-scales of Municipal teachers to the appellants herein being Shiksha
Karmis. We are in complete agreement with the view taken by the High
Court.
9. In view of the above discussion and for the reasons stated above,
present appeal fails and the same deserves to be dismissed and is
accordingly dismissed. However, in the facts and circumstances of the
case, there shall be no order as to costs.
………………………………….J.
[M.R. SHAH]
NEW DELHI; ………………………………….J.
MAY 20, 2022. [B.V. NAGARATHNA]
9