http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 5  

PETITIONER: GURPAL TULI AND ORS., ETC.

       Vs.

RESPONDENT: STATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS.

DATE OF JUDGMENT28/09/1984

BENCH: PATHAK, R.S. BENCH: PATHAK, R.S. MISRA, R.B. (J)

CITATION:  1984 AIR 1901            1985 SCR  (1) 882  1984 SCC  Supl.  716     1984 SCALE  (2)557

ACT:      Constitution of  India 1950-Article  14-equal  pay  for equal  work’-  Principle-Applicability  of-State  Government circular stipulating  different grades of pay-Entitlement to a grade when arises,      Civil   Services:    Punjab   Education   Service-State Government circular  different grades  of pay  for different categories-Entitlement to a grade when arises.

HEADNOTE:      The  appellants   who  were  employed  as  Masters  and Mistresses in  High and  Higher Secondary Schools run by the State Government  and possessed  an M.A. or M.Sc. or B.T. or B.Ed. degree  contended in  their writ  petitions that  they were paid  according to  the pay  scale of  Rs. 220-500  and claimed that  they were  entitled to  either of  the  higher grades set  forth in  paragraph 2  of the  State  Government Circular Letter  dated July 29, 1967 viz. Rs. 300-25-450/25- 600 for  those with 1st and 2nd Division Master’s Degree and Rs. 250-25-450/25-250  for those  with  3rd  Class  Master’s Degree. The  High  Court  negatived  their  contentions  and dismissed the  writ petition,  and this  was affirmed by the Division Bench in appeal.      Dismissing the Appeal to this Court, ^      HELD: 1.  The grades  specified in  paragraph 2  of the Circular Letter  dated July, 29, 1967 are applicable only to those who specifically hold the posts of lecturer. There are a limited  number of  such posts, and appointment to them is strictly subject  to the  conditions detailed in paragraph 2 of the  Circular Letter.  The contention  on behalf  of  the appellants that  on the  principle of  "equal pay  for equal work"-Randhir Singh v. Union of India and Ors., [1982] 3 SCR 298 they  are entitled  to the grades mentioned in para 2 of the Circular Letter dated July 29, 1967 has there fore to be negatived. [888 D; C]      2. The  appellants claim  the benefit of paragraph 2 of the Circular  Letter dated  July 29,  1967 and  therefore no reliance can be placed by them on the Circular Letters dated February, 19,  1979 and  September, 20,  1979  which  relate merely (o the scheme embodied in the Circular Letter 883

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 5  

dated July  23, 1957.  The Circular  Letter dated  July, 29, 1967 operates  on a  very different  plane from the Circular Letter dated July 23, 1957. [888 B; 885 E]      3. The  decision of  this Court  in State  of Punjab v. Kirpal Singh Bhatia, [1976] 1 SCR 529 is of no assistance to the  appellants.   That  was  a  case  which  was  primarily concerned with Circular Letter dated July, 23, [885 D]

JUDGMENT:      CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal Nos. 3452-54 and 4030-32 of 1982.      Appeals by  Special leave  from the  Judgment and order dated the 20th November, 1979 of the Punjab and Haryana High Court in L.P.A. Nos. 26,62, 29, 38,39, and 30 of 1978.      R.K. Garg  and N.S. Das Bahl for the Appellants in CAs. Nos 3452-54 of 1982.      M.K.  Ramamurthi,   and  Mrs.   Urmila  Sirur  for  the Appellants in CAs. 4031/82 and CAs. 4030-32 of 1982.      P.P. Rao and D.D. Sharma for the Respondents.      The Judgment of the Court was delivered by      PATHAK, J.  The appellants, in these appeals by special leave, are  aggrieved by the judgment of a Division Bench of the High Court of Punjab and Haryana affirming the dismissal of their  writ petitions  by a  learned Single Judge of that Court.      The appellants are teachers in the service of the State of Punjab.  They claim  the grades prescribed in paragraph 2 of the  Government Circular  letter No.  2036-ED.  1-67/2167 dated July  29, 1967, and in that regard seek the benefit of the Circular letter No. 9/9179-FR (2)/143 dated February 19, 1979 and  its clarification by Circular letter No. 8937-5ED. 1179/2659 dated September 20, 1979.      The Circular  letter dated July 29, 1967 gave effect to the recommendations  of the  Kothari Commission  with effect from November  1, 1966  in respect of teachers in Government Schools. Paragraph 2 of the Circular letter provided:-           "2. Lectures  in Higher  Secondary Schools, Punjab      Institute of English and Masters/Mistresses with Post- 884      graduate  qualifications   in   High/Higher   Secondary      Schools will  be placed  in Rs. 300-25-450/25-600 grade      provided  they  have  1st  and  2nd  Division  Master’s      Degree. Those  with 3rd  Class Master’s  Degree will be      placed in the grade of Rs. 250-25-400/25-550."      It  was   specified  that   "the  number  of  posts  in Lecturer’s grade  will  be  1517  i.e.  742  posts  for  the existing school Lecturers and 829 additional posts for other Masters/Mistresses with  Post-graduate  qualifications."  It was clarified  that "the Masters/Mistresses will be eligible to  Lecturer’s   grade  only   if  they  have  Post-graduate qualifications in the subject of their teaching. No one will be entitled  to those  829 additional  posts  automatically. These posts will be allocated to various subjects keeping in view the  requirements of  the educational  institutions and the  appointments   will  be   made  keeping   in  view  the rules/instructions as  amended from time to time." Paragraph 3 stated  that "all  trained graduates and all other Masters with Post-graduate qualifications, who are not fitted in the scale of Lecturer, will be in the scale of Rs. 220-8-300-10- 400/20-500."      It is  apparent that paragraph 2 of the Circular letter dated July  29, 1967 is concerned essentially with providing for a Lecturer’s Grade:

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 3 of 5  

    (1)   It  was  intended  to  have  1571  posts  in  the           Lecturer’s grade,  consisting of 742 posts for the           existing  Lecturers  and  another  829  posts  for           Masters or  Mistresses. Masters or Mistresses were           eligible for  these posts  in the Lecturer’s grade           only    if     they    possessed     Post-graduate           qualifications in  the subject  of their teaching.           Those who  did not satisfy that criterion were not           eligible for  those posts.  Moreover, no  one  was           entitled  to  any  of  the  829  additional  posts           automatically. The  additional posts  were  to  be           distributed with  reference to different subjects,           and the  distribution would  be made having regard           to   the    requirements   of    the   educational           institutions  and   subject  to   the  rules   and           instructions currently in force.      (2)   Existing Lecturers and Masters or Mistresses with           Post  graduate  qualifications,  who  possessed  a           Master’s degree  in the  first or second division,           would be-entitled  to the  grade  of  Rs.  300-25-           450/25-600. Lecturers and 885           Masters   or    Mistresses   with    Post-graduate           qualifications   who possessed  a Master’s degrees           in the  third division  would be  entitled to  the           grade of Rs. 250-25-400/25-550 .      The appellants  say that  they are  employed as Masters and Mistresses  in High  and Higher Secondary Schools run by the Punjab  Government and  possess an M.A. or M.Sc. or B.T. or B.Ed. degree and some of them have even acquired an M.Ed. degree. They  are presently  paid according to the pay scale Rs. 220-500.  They claim that they are entitled to either of the higher  grades set  forth in paragraph 2 of the Circular letter dated  July 29, 1967. From what has gone before it is clear that  they can legitimately claim the benefit of those grades only  if they are appointed to the posts of Lecturer. And they  do not  dispute that  they are  not incumbents  of those posts.      Much reliance  has been  placed on the decision of this Court in  State of  Punjab v.  Kirpal Singh  Bhatia. In  our opinion, that  case is  of no  assistance to the appellants. That was  a case which was primarily concerned with Circular letter No. 5058 FR-II-57/5600 dated July 23, 1957.      The Circular  letter dated  July 29, 1967 operates on a very different plane from the Circular letter dated July 23, 1957. A  brief reference to the historical background of the Circular letter dated July 23, 1957 will suffice.      Concerned  at  the  low  salaries  granted  to  certain categories of  Government servants,  the  Punjab  Government issued Circular  letter No.  5058 FR-II/5600  dated July 23, 1957 revising  their scales  of pay.  Paragraph 3 classified all teachers  in the Education Department according to their qualifications in two broad categories, category A being:-           "B.A./B.Sc./B.Com./B.Sc.     (Agriculture)     and      B.T./Diploma in  Physical Education/Diploma  in  Senior      Basic Training". and they would now carry the scale of pay:- 886           "Rs. 100  -8-190-10-250 with  a higher  start  for      M.A. or M.Sc. as at present."      As is evident, the category was defined by reference to the possession  of the specified graduate degree or Diploma. In the event such a teacher also held a Post-graduate degree he was  entitled to  a higher start in the grade. The grade, however, remained the same.

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 4 of 5  

    It appears that several teacher tiled writ petitions in the High  Court claiming revised scales of pay on the ground that they  had taken  graduate degrees  and, therefore, were entitled to  the benefit  of  the  grade  mentioned  against Category in  the Circular  letter dated  July 23,  1957.  In opposition to  the  writ  petitions,  the  State  Government contended that  the letter  did not contemplate tho grant of the grade  to all teachers but only to teachers appointed as Masters. The  High Court  held the  teachers entitled to the benefit of  the revised  grade, whether or not they had been appointed as  masters, because,  in the  opinion of the High Court, the  qualifying criterion  was the  possession  of  a graduate degree. The judgment of the High Court was affirmed by this  Court in  Kirpal Singh  Bhatia (Suprd).  The  State Government  found   it  difficult,   having  regard  to  The prevailing burden  on its financial resources, to extend the benefit of  the Circular  letter dated  July 23, 1957 to the much wider section of teachers covered in consequence of the Court’s judgement.  Accordingly, the State Government issued Circular letter  No. 9/9/79-FR  (2)/143 dated  February  19, 1979, paragraph  3 of  which stated  that in order to ensure that "these  unintended and  large financial implications do not continue  arising in  future" the  whole matter had been reconsidered by  the State  Government and  as a  result the government ordered  that  henceforth  the  teachers  or  the Education Department  would not automatically be entitled to placement in  the higher scales of pay in terms of paragraph 3 of  the Circular  letter dated  July 23,  1957 by the mere circumstance  of   their  improving   or  acquiring   higher qualifications in the course of their service. The rigour of the restriction  was relaxed  in some  measure. Paragraph  3 said further:-           "However, in order to avoid discrimination between      teachers who have already been allowed higher scales of      pay on  account of having improved their qualifications      and those  who have  not yet  been allowed this benefit      even though  they also possess higher qualifications it      is  decided   that  all   teachers  in   the  Education      Department who have 887      improved their  qualifications before the issue of this      letter may be allowed the benefit of higher scale of on      the basis of their qualifications."      The  benefit   was  not  extended  to  those  who  were appointed or who had improved their qualifications after the issue of  that Circular  letter. The  teachers continued  to agitate  for   a  more   generous  dispensation.  The  State Government  then   issued   Circular   letter.   No.   8937- 5ED.1179/2659 dated September 20, 1979. which declared:           "The implementation  of the  decision contained in      Finance  Department   Circular  letter  No.  9/9/79  FR      (2)/143 dated  February 19,  1979 to  grant higher  pay      scales  to   the  teachers   on  the  basis  of  higher      qualifications   was   kept   pending   for   want   of      clarification  on   certain  points  from  the  Finance      Department  which  has  now  become  available  and  is      reproduced below:-      1.   The higher scale may be allocated from the date of           passing the  respective higher  examination by the           concerned teacher  where  this  has  already  been           done. However,  actual payment  at enhanced  rates           should commence  from 12  2.79 and  the payment of           arrears accruing  from the  date  of  passing  the           examination till  13.2.1979 be  restricted to  the           maximum for 38 months.

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 5 of 5  

    2.    The  ben fit  of the  higher scale may be allowed           from the date a particular teacher is appointed on           regular basis  or the  date of  passing the higher           examination, which  ever is later, but the payment           of arrears  as a  result of  grant of such benefit           should be  restricted to  a period  of  38  months           only, as already mentioned above.      3.    The  teachers placed in the higher scale can only           be regularly  adjusted when corresponding posts in           the higher  scale become  available; in  that case           such teachers  may continue  to enjoy  the  higher           scale as a personal measure till they are adjusted           against regular  posts as and when the same become           available."      It was  clarified that  the  contemplated  benefit  was confined to 888 the categories  of teachers mentioned in the Circular letter No. 5058 FR II-57/5600 dated July 23, 1957.      The appellants  claim the benefit of paragraph 2 of the Circular letter  dated  July  29,  1967,  and  therefore  no reliance can be placed by them on the Circular letters dated February 19,  1979 and  September  20,  1979,  which  relate merely to  the scheme  embodied in the Circular letter dated July 23, 1957.      The appellants  contend that on the principle of "equal pay for equal work", affirmed by this Court in Randhir Singh v. Union  of India  & Ors.  they are  entitled to the grades mentioned in  paragraph 2  of the Circular letter dated July 29, 1967.  It is urged that like those Masters or Mistresses who have  been given  that benefit  they have acquired Post- graduate qualifications and are doing the same kind of work. As has  been explained  earlier,  the  grades  specified  in paragraph 2  of the  Circular letter dated July 29, 1967 are applicable only  to those who specifically hold the posts of Lecturer. There  are a  limited number  of such  posts,  and appointment to  them is  strictly subject  to the conditions detailed in paragraph 2 of the Circular letter.      In the  result the  appeals fail and are dismissed, but in the  circumstances of  the case  there is  no order as to costs. N.V.K.    Appeals dismissed. 889