9911796707
TMI Blog1994 (9) TMI 364X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n age group of 15-35 years and to provide literacy to the children in the age group of 5-15 years, who were drop-outs from the primary and middle school level or who had never joined any regular school. At the relevant time there was another Scheme known as State Social Education Scheme in the State of Haryana, for imparting education to the illiterates, in the villages known as State Adult Education Programme. The teachers employed under the Scheme were known as squad teachers. 3. In the year 1981 the services of the head squad teachers and squad teachers were regularised and the pay scales of regular Head Masters and teachers of primary schools maintained by the State Government were given to them. The petitioners in the aforesaid writ petition claimed that they were also performing the same nature of duties as performed by squad teachers as such they were also entitled to pay scales of the squad teachers under the Education Department along with other benefits from the date they were initially appointed. 4. On behalf of the State, this claim was contested. According to the State, the writ petitioners who were instructors, did not perform similar duties as performed by squad te ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ine of "equal pay for equal work" if both the classes of persons perform similar functions and duties under the same employer. Ultimately it was held that instructors were entitled to the same pay scale as sanctioned to the squad teachers and a direction was given to fix the scale of pay of the instructors with effect from the date of their initial appointment by ignoring the break, in service on account of six months fresh appointments. 5. From the judgment aforesaid, it appears that the aforesaid direction had been given to the State of Haryana. In the Writ Petition aforesaid, Union of India had not been impleaded as a party. At some later stage Union of India was added as a proforma respondent. From the judgment it does not appear that Union of India was involved in any manner in the implementation of the scheme. 6. In the present petition for initiating the proceeding for contempt of this Court, against the respondents, it has been alleged that by not having paid the arrears of salary to the instructors, in terms of the aforesaid order passed by this Court, respondents are liable to be punished. On 7.8.1991 this Court passed the following order : State Counsel i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fferent instructors under the Adult and Non-formal Education Scheme, which was a temporary scheme. He expressed the predicament of the State of Haryana in releasing any further fund, beyond what has already been paid, and sought a direction to the Union of India to contribute the balance of the amount. 8. During hearing of the application, reference was made to later judgments of this Court, where Benches consisting of three Judges have reviewed all the earlier judgments of this Court in respect of the doctrine of "equal pay for equal work". Special reference was made to the judgment in the case of State of Madhya Pradesh v. Pramod Bhartiya, where it has been pointed out that the doctrine of equal pay for equal work was neither a mechanical rule nor does it mean geometrical equality. The concept of reasonable classification and all other rules evolved with respect to Articles 14 and 16(1) come into play wherever complaint of infraction of the said rule fails for consideration. It was further said that it was not enough to say that the qualifications were same or the schools were of the same status or the service conditions were similar, what was more crucial was whether ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y and punished, the Court has to record a finding that such disobedience was willful and intentional. If from the circumstances of a particular case, brought to the notice of the court, the Court is satisfied that although there has been a disobedience but such disobedience is the result of some compelling circumstances which it was not possible for the contemner to comply with the order, the Court may not punish the alleged contemner. 10. In the present case, there is no specific direction in the aforesaid judgment of this Court dated 2.6.1988 in the connected Writ Petition, to pay any particular amount to the instructors, This Court has simply decided the question as to whether they are entitled to the scale of pay which has been given to squad teachers. Having decided that question in favour of the instructors, this directed that arrears be paid to the instructors w.e.f. their respective dates of appointments, treating them at par with the squad teachers. This direction will involve payment of about 28 crores of rupees was neither known to the Court not to the parties to that proceeding. As such, this Court is now entitled to examine the question as to whether in the special fa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
