9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (9) TMI 1567X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eacher is the one who has been trained for the purposes of teaching. In the absence of such training, the Respondent cannot be said to be a Trained Matric Teacher entitled to the pay scale meant for such teachers. The classification based upon educational qualification for grant of higher pay scale to a trained person or a person possessing higher qualification is a valid classification. The order passed by the Tribunal as affirmed by the High Court is not sustainable in law - Appeal allowed. - Civil Appeal No. 7577 of 2019 (Arising out of SLP (Civil) No. 23279 of 2019) (Diary No. 13251 of 2017) - - - Dated:- 26-9-2019 - L. NAGESWARA RAO AND HEMANT GUPTA, JJ. JUDGMENT Hemant Gupta, J. 1. The challenge in the present app ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... chedule, (i) For the scale of pay appearing against Sl. No. 2 in Col. (4) under the heading Revised Scales of Pay , the following scale of pay shall be substituted, namely;- ₹ 775-12-871-E.B.-14-1025. (ii) For the scale of pay appearing against Sl. No. 6 in Col. (4) under the heading Revised Scales of Pay , the following scale of pay shall be substituted namely: (a) ₹ 975-25--1, 150-E.B.-30-1,660 (For all posts except Trained Matric Teachers) 4. Thereafter, a corrigendum was issued on August 27, 1992 stating the scales of pay for the Untrained Intermediate Teacher and Trained Matric Teacher. The said corrigendum reads as under: ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lication of review or modification but since such application has been filed after two years of the order having been passed by the Tribunal, the same was dismissed on the ground of laches as well as there is no error apparent on the face of the order. Thereafter, the Appellant filed the review petition which was dismissed on January 22, 2015. It is thereafter the writ petition was filed which was dismissed vide the order impugned in the present appeal. 8. Learned Counsel for the Appellant submitted that the separate pay scales are provided for Untrained Matric Teachers (₹ 975-25-1, 150-E.B.-30-1,660) and for Trained Matric Teachers (₹ 1,080-30-1,440-EB-30-1,800). Merely because the Respondent is intermediate, that is higher ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... its counsel before the Tribunal. 10. We have heard learned Counsel for the parties and find that the distinction between Trained Matric Teacher and Untrained Matric Teacher has not been appreciated by the Tribunal and the same error was committed by the High Court as well. 11. The concession given by the learned State Counsel before the Tribunal was a concession in law and contrary to the statutory rules. Such concession is not binding on the State for the reason that there cannot be any estoppel against law. The Rules provide for a specific Grade of Pay, therefore, the concession given by the learned State Counsel before the Tribunal is not binding on the Appellant. 12. The Trained Matric Teacher is the one who has been trained f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
