http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 7  

PETITIONER: UNION OF INDIA , MOHANAN , P.I. MOHD. IQBAL  & OTHERS

       Vs.

RESPONDENT: UNION OF INDIA & OTHERS P. SATHIKUMARANA NAIR & OTHERS

DATE OF JUDGMENT:       29/04/1997

BENCH: S.B. MAJMUDAR, M. JAGANNADHA RAO

ACT:

HEADNOTE:

JUDGMENT:                             WITH                Writ Petition No. 277 of 1994                             WITH           CIVIL APPEALS NOS. 3108-3109     of 1997   (Arising out of S.L.P. Nos. 648 of 1990 & 6894 of 1994)                       J U D G M E N T JAGANNADHA RAO, J.      The  civil  Appeal  No.  913  of  1987,  Special  leave petitions Nos.  648 of  1990 &  6894 of  1994 and  the  Writ petition No.277  of 1994 are all connected and can be ****** of together.  In the  two special  leave petitions, we grant leave as  the same  questions arise which arise in the Civil Appeal. The  Civil Appeal  is filed  by the  Union of  India Represented by  Secretary, Ministry of Education, Government of  India   and  the   Administrator,  Union   Territory  of Lakshadweep, Kavaratti.  There are  four respondents  in the said appeal  and  they  were  writ  petitioners  in  O.P.No. 2062/80(A) filed  before the Kerala High Court. They claimed that the  proceedings  issued  by  the  Administrator  dated 1.4.1976 re-designating  them as  Junior  Lecturers  against their original  designation as  lecturers in  the Jawaharlal Nehru College  at Kavaratti  was illegal  and that they were entitled    to  the  scale  of  Rs.  400-800  applicable  to Lecturers rather  than the  scale of  Rs. 350-700  which was applicable  to   Junior  Lecturers   and  which   scale  was applicable to  the post-graduate  teachers in  the Secondary High School.  It may  be noted that the scale of Rs. 350-700 was revised  by the  Third pay  Commission  as  Rs.  550-900 w.e.f. 1.1.1973  while the  scale of Rs. 400-800 was revised as Rs.  700-1300  w.e.f. 1.1.1973. The said O.P. No. 2062/80 (A) filed  by the  said four writ petitioners was allowed by the learned  single  Judge  of  the  Kerala  High  Court  on 10.8.1982 holding  that the petitioners therein could not be equated with  Post-graduate teachers  in the  Secondary High School (who  were to  be re-designated  as Junior lecturers) and that  they were  entitled to  the scale  of Rs.  400-800 applicable to  lecturers.  After  holding  so,  the  learned Single Judge,  however,  directed  the  Union  of  India  to "consider’ the claims of the four writ petitioners in regard to the  pay scales  in accordance with law. Against the said

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 7  

judgment of the learned Single Judge, Writ Appeal No. 736 of 1982  was   preferred  by   the  union   of  India  and  the Administrator of the Union of India and the Administrator of the Union  Territory of  Lakshadweep. The  said  appeal  was dismissed by  a division  Bench of  the Kerala High Court on 17.8.1984. It  was directed  that the  Union of India should take a  decision on  a consideration  of the material before it, in the light of the directions contained in the judgment in O.P.No.2062/80(A)  and that  the said  decision should be given within  six months from the date of the receipt of the copy of  the judgment.  Against the  said  judgment  of  the Division Bench, Special Leave Petition  was preferred by the Union of  India and  the Administrator,  Union Territory  of Lakshadweep. leave  was granted  and  the  appeal  has  been registered as Civil Appeal No. 913 of 1987.      Certain events took place subsequent to the disposal of the Writ  Appeal above-mentioned.  In  compliance  with  the directions of  the learned  Single Judge  of the Kerala High Court,  the  union  of  India  passed  orders  on  11.8.1986 rejecting the  contentions of  the said Writ petitioners and holding that they were only entitled to the pay scale of Rs. 350-700(which was  revised as  Rs. 550-900 w.e.f. 1.1.1973). applicable to  post-graduate teachers  and not  to  the  pay scale of Rs. 400-800 applicable to lecturers (revised as Rs. 700-1300 w.e.f.  1.1.1973). The  Union government  held that the duties  and responsibilities of the Writ petitioners are comparable with  those of counter-parts in Class XI & XII of the Senior  Secondary School  and that  they  could  not  be equated with  the duties  and responsibilities  of lecturers working in the degree college run by the Union Government.      On the  ground that  Union of  India in its order dated 11.8.1986 could not have gone against the findings  given by the learned single Judge of the Kerala High Court in O.P.No. 2062/80(A) and  by the Division Bench in Writ Appeal No. 736 of  1982   as  to   the   equation   of   the   duties   and responsibilities of the  writ petitioners, namely, that they were similar  to those  of  lecturers  in  degree  colleges, Contempt Petition  No. O.P.  (Contempt) No. 3730 of 1986 was filed by the said Writ Petitioners in the Kerala High Court. By   judgment dated 29.9.1986 a Division Bench of the Kerala High Court  while noting that the Special Leave Petition was granted against  the judgment of the Division Bench  in Writ Appeal No.  736 of  1982 observed  inasmuch as  no stay  was granted by  the Supreme  Court of India, it was incumbent on the Union  of India  to implement the judgment of the Kerala High Court in the light of the Findings given by the learned Single Judge and the Division Bench and that it was not open to the  Union of  India to  pass the  orders dated 11.8.1986 refusing to  restore the designation of the writ petitioners as Lecturers and that it was also not open to Union of India to refuse to grant the scale of Rs. 400-800.      Consequent to  the directions  given in  the above said contempt petition  by the  Division Bench of the Kerala High Court, the  Union of  India passed  a subsequent order dated 24.12.1986 re-designating  the writ petitioners as lecturers and granting  the scale  of Rs. 400-800 w.e.f. 15.7.1972(the date of  establishment of  the junior  College at Kavaratti) and  the  further  revised  scale  of  Rs.  700-1300  w.e.f. 1.1.1973.  A   consequential  order   was  issued   by   the Administrator  on   10.2.1987.  The  four  writ  petitioners apprehended that  in the  event of  the Civil  Appeal  being allowed by  the Supreme  Court. they  might be  compelled to refund the  arrears as  well as current salary that might be paid to  them in  the scale  of Rs.  400-800 or  the revised scale of Rs. 700-1300 (or such subsequent revised scale), as

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 3 of 7  

the case  may be.  They, therefore,  moved this Court in the Civil Appeal for suitable orders. This Court passed an order on 2.4.1987  after hearing  both sides  that in the event of Civil Appeal going against writ petitioners, it would not be necessary for  them to refund any salary paid to them in the scale of Rs. 400-800 or in the revised scale of Rs. 700-1300 or any further revised scale.      We  shall   now  mention  how  the  two  special  leave petitions and  the Writ  Petition have come to be filed. The Union of  India and  the Administrator,  union Territory  of Lakshadweep proposed  to  apply  the  original  order  dated 11.8.1986 granting  only the  scale of  Rs.  350-700(or  the revised scale  of Rs. 550-900) to the remaining lecturers in the Jawaharlal  Nehru College,  Kavaratti and  also  to  two lecturers in  the Mahatma  Gandhi College,  Androth,  rather than the  scale of  Rs. 400-800(or  the revised scale of Rs. 700-1300). In  fact these  personnel continued to be treated as junior  lecturers and  not as lecturers. They, therefore, moved the  Central Administrative  Tribunal  in  O.A.No.  K- 274/87. The  application was filed by 14 persons of whom two were from  the Mahatma Gandhi College, Androth and remaining 12 were  from the  Jawaharlal Nehru  College, Kavaratti.  we have already  noticed that  the four  other lecturers of the Jawaharlal Nehru  college, Kavaratti  Succeeded  before  the High Court and were getting the higher scale of pay. But the Central  Administrative   Tribunal  in  its  Judgment  dated 31.10.1989 came  to a  conclusion   different from  the  one arrived by  the Kerala  High Court.  it held that the duties and responsibilities  of those  14 persons who were teaching pre-degree classes were not comparable to those of lecturers in degree  colleges.  Both  the  Jawaharlal  Nehru  College, Kavaratti and  Mahatma Gandhi  college,  Androth  were  pre- degree colleges.  The Tribunal, in fact, followed an earlier judgment rendered  by  it  in  O.A.No.K-335/87  Filed  by  a lecturer  of  the  Jawaharlal  Nehru  College  by  name  Dr. Ramachandran (who we are informed is no more) wherein it had come to  the conclusion that the duties and responsibilities of the  lecturers in pre-degree colleges were different from the duties  and responsibilities  of those  teaching  degree classes particularly  in the  Union Territory  of Delhi. The Tribunal noticed  that there  was no  degree college  in the Union Territory  of Lakshadweep  and that  there was  only a degree college  and no junior college in the Union territory of  Delhi.  The  attention  of  the  Central  Administrative Tribunal was  invited to another judgment of the Kerala High Court in  O.P. No.  497 of  1980 filed  by    certain  other lecturers(which, we  are told  later  went  to  appeal  writ Appeal No.  772 of  19820. In  that   case also, it was held both   the Kerala High Cort that the staff teaching 11th and 12th classes  in the  Senior, Secondary  School and who were employed in  the junior college w.e.f 15.7.1972 could not be treated as  junior lecturers but should treated as lecturers and be  given the  higher scale,  applicable  to  lecturers. However, the  Central Administrative  Tribunal did  not feel persuaded to follow the judgment of the Kerala High Court in the  said   O.P.  No.   497/80.  The  result  was  that  the application O.A.  No. K-274/87  filed by  the 14 applicants. was dismissed.  Petitioners 1  to 4  and 7  to 14 before the Central Administrative  Tribunal then  moved this  Court  in Special Leave  petition No. 648 of 1990 against the judgment of the said Tribunal dated 31.10.1989 while petitioners 5& ^ before the  said Tribunal  filed S.L.P.  No.  6894  of  1994 against the  said judgment. we have already granted leave in these two special leave petitions.      Writ Petition(C) No. 277 of 1994 has been filed in this

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 4 of 7  

Court by  6 other  petitioners of  whom 3 are working in the Jawaharlal Nehru College, Kavaratti and 3 are working in the mahatma Gandhi  College, Androth.  They are aggrieved by the fact that  so far they were concerned the Union of India and the Administrator were treating them as junior lecturers and not granting  them the  pay scale  of Rs.  400-800  (revised scale of Rs. 700-1300 w.e.f. 1.1.1973 or the further revised scale of  Rs. 2200-4000  w.e.f. 1.1.1986).  They; approached this court  under Article 32 of the Constitution of India on the ground  that in  view of  the judgment  of the  Tribunal dated 31.10.1989  rendered in  the case of persons similarly situated,  there  was  no  point  in  approaching  the  said Tribunal once again particularly when notice had been issued in the  Special leave  petitions  Nos.  648/90  and  6894/94 against the  judgment of  the Tribunal.  In view of the said Judgment, notice was ordered in the writ petition and it was tagged alongwith Civil appeal No. 913/87 and the two special leave Petitions.      Learned senior  counsel for  the Union of India and the Administrator, Union  Territory  of  Lakshadweep  Shri  P.A. Choudhary submitted  before us  that  the  four  petitioners filed O.P.No.  2062/80(A) and  four  others  were  initially working in the Senior Higher Secondary School, Kavaratti and were teaching  classes 11  & 12  that later w.e.f. 15.7.1972 the said two classes were converted into a junior college at Kavaratti. Initially these teachers were no doubt designated and appointed as lecturers in the scale of Rs. 350-700 which was the  scale of  post-graduate  teachers  in  the  School. Taking advantage  of their designation as lecturers the said writ petitioners  claimed the  scale of lecturers namely Rs. 400-800  that was being paid to lecturers in degree colleges at Delhi.  In order  to rectify  the  position  orders  were passed  on   1.4.1976  re-designating  personnel  as  junior lecturers w.e.f.  20.5.1975 and  reiterating that  they were only entitled  to the  scale of  Rs. 350-700  and not to the scale of  Rs. 400-800. Rules were also issued in that behalf w.e.f. 1.4.1976. Learned senior counsel contended that while it was  true that  these eight teachers who were employed in the junior  college satisfied the minimum requirement of 2nd Class M.A.,  applicable to  lecturers in  degree colleges of the Union  Government, but  that it could not he denied that the duties  and responsibilities  of the  teaching staff who teach in  pre-degree colleges  were certainly different from the duties  and responsibilities  of  teachers  teaching  in degree colleges  whether at  Delhi or at any other place. He contended that  qualitatively  the  level  of  teaching  was different  and  on  that  basis,  there  could  be  a  valid difference in  the scale  of pay.  He, therefore,  contended that  these   personnel  whether  they  were  designated  as lecturers or junior lecturers were not entitled to the scale of Rs.  400-800 which  was applicable only to those teaching students in the degree classes.      On the  other hand,  it was contended by learned senior counsel Shri  K. John  Mathew &  Sri k.  Sukumaran that  the judgment of  the learned  single judge in O.P.No. 2062/80(A) and of  the Division  bench in Writ Appeal No. 736/82 showed that  it  was  not  disputed  by  union  of  India  and  the Administrator, Union  Territory of  Lakshadweep  before  the Kerala High  Court that  the duties  and responsibilities of these personnel were the same as those of lecturers teaching in degree  colleges. It  is also  pointed out that these two colleges Jawaharlal  Nehru College,  Kavaratti  and  Mahatma Gandhi College,  Androth were  both  affiliated  to  calicut University and  that in  the said  University, there  is  no distinction between  the  pay-scales  applicable  to  junior

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 5 of 7  

lecturers teaching  degree  classes.  Learned  counsel  also referred to  the Government’s  order in  the State of Kerala wherein junior  lecturers teaching  pre-degree  classes  and lecturers teaching  degree classes were to draw the same pay scale. In  fact, the  Government of  Kerala passed  an order extending the  said benefit  to  all  the  Junior  Lecturers working in  aided Private junior colleges, thereby entitling the latter  to draw  the same pay scale of lecturers. From a geographical point  of view  the position  was that  in  the entire State  of Kerala  in government  colleges and private colleges and  in particular  under the Calicut University to which these  two colleges  were affiliated, junior lecturers teaching Pre-degree classes were drawing the same benefit to those working  as junior  Lecturers in  these  two  colleges which were  affiliated to  the Calicut University. In reply, the learned  senior  counsel  for  the  Union  territory  of Lakshadweep Shri P.A. Choudhary contended that assuming that junior lecturers  teaching pre-degree  classes and lecturers teaching degree  classes were  being given the same scale of pay by  the government  of Kerala  and by  the aided private colleges in  the state  of Kerala  and also  in the  Calicut University, it  is not  permissible to  issue a direction to the union  Government and the Administrator, Union Territory of Lakshadweep  to equate the pay scales of junior lecturers and lecturers  so far  as union Territory was concerned. The reason was  that the  employers in  the two  situations were different,  that   is,  the   State  of  Kerala  or  calicut University on  the one  hand  and  the  union  Territory  of Lakshadweep on  the other.  learned   counsel relied  on the judgment of  the supreme  Court   in  The  State  Of  Madhya Pradesh Vs. S.C. Mandawar(1955) (1) SCR 599) to say that the Court would  not direct  equation of pay scales of personnel of  different   employers,  namely   those  of  the  Central Government and  those of  a State Government. Learned senior counsel  also  invited  our  attention  to  certain  general principles concerning  Article 14  laid  down  in  Shri  Ram Krishna Dalmia  Vs. Shri  Justice S.R.  Tendolkar  &  Others (1959 SCR 279).      We  have   given  our   anxious  consideration  to  the contentions raised  by the  learned senior  counsel on  both sides, We  have come  to the  conclusion that in exercise of our discretionary  jurisdiction under  Article  136  of  the Constitution of  India  we  would  not  interfere  with  the findings given  in the  judgment of the learned Single Judge of  the  Kerala  High  Court  in  O.P.No.  2062/80(A)  dated 10.8.1982 as  affirmed by  the Division Bench in Writ Appeal No. 736/82  dated  17.8.1984.  We  note  that  in  the  said judgments it  was stated  that the  Union of  India  in  its counter affidavit  filed in  the Kerala  High Court  did not take the  stand  that  the  "nature,  status  or  functions’ attributable to  the post  of Junior  Lecturer in  the  Pre- degree Colleges  were different  from those of Lecturer in a Degree College. We also note that against the other judgment of the  Kerala High Court in O.P. No. 497/80 (referred to in the judgment  of the  Central  Administrative  Tribunal  and which was  affirmed in  Writ Appeal  No. 772/82), no special leave petition  has been filed by the union of India in this Court. In  the said  Judgment of  the Kerala High Court also there is  a finding  that there  was nothing  on  record  to indicate that  these persons (Junior lecturers in pre-degree College) did  not perform  similar functions  as compared to lecturers working in Degree Colleges in the Delhi area. That finding has  become final. It is also not disputed before us that in  the Calicut  University to which these two colleges in the Union Territory of Lakshdweep are affiliated, the pay

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 6 of 7  

scales of  Junior lecturers teaching  pre-degree classes and the pay  scale of  lecturers teaching degree classes and the pay scale  of lecturers  teaching degree  classes is one and the same. In this connection, we may also refer to the order of the  Government of  Kerala in  G.O  Ms.  487/70/Edn.  (F) Deptt. dated  P1.11.1970 equalizing the pay scales of junior lecturers in  private aided colleges with those of lecturers in government colleges. In Government Colleges in Kerala the pay scale  of junior  lecturers teaching  pre-degree classes and lecturers  teaching degree  classes is again one and the same. In other words, speaking from a geographical angle the pay scale  of junior lecturers and lecturers are the same in Kerala  and   in  the  Calicut  University,  with  the  sole exception of  these  two  colleges  in  Union  Territory  of Lakshadweep  which   are  also  affiliated  to  the  Calicut University. In  the light  of the above factual position, we are of  the view  that, in  exercise of  our discretion.  we would not  interfere with the findings arrived at in O.P.No. 2062/80(A) by  the Kerala  High Court  as affirmed  in  Writ Appeal No.  736 of  1982 holding  that the pay scales of the junior lecturers in Union Territory of Lakshadweep are to be on par  with the pay; scales of lecturers in degree colleges under the Union of India.      In addition,  our attention  has been  invited  by  the learned  counsel  for  the  writ  petitioners  to  a  recent communication of  the Administrator  of Union  Territory  of Lakshadweep dated 3.2.1995 wherein he has recommended to the Government   of India that the Junior lecturers in these two colleges in  the Union Territory  of Lakshadweep be paid the same scale  of pay as lecturers in the colleges of the union Territory and  he has  stated that  the additional financial burden would  be around thirty thousand per year which could be borne  by the  Union Territory.  He has  also stated that there are  only 34 lecturers who have to be given this scale attributable to  the post  of lecturers  in degree colleges, the  present   revised  scale  being  Rs.  2200-4000  w.e.f. 1.1.1986. In  view of  these facts, we do not deem it proper to interfere  with the scale of Rs. 400-800 as being payable to these  junior lecturers  w.e.f. 1.1.1972 and Rs. 700-1300 w.e.f. 1.1.1973  and Rs. 2200-4000 w.e.f. 1.1.1986. The said pay scale  will be  applicable to these junior lecturers now designated as  lecturers  from  their  respective  dates  of appointment in  the respective  junior colleges in the Union Territory of Lakshadweep. The Civil Appeal is dismissed.      In view  of our  decision  in  the  Civil  Appeal,  the consequence must  necessarily be that the 14 petitioners who have  approached  the  Central  Administrative  Tribunal  on O.A.No. K-274/87  must also  be treated likewise as the writ petitioners-respondents in  C.A. No. 913 of 1987. Therefore, Civil Appeals  arising out  the Special Leave petitions Nos. 648/90 &  6894/94 are  also allowed  granting the  appellant therein the  same relief,  as to pay scales above-mentioned. Coming  to  writ  Petition  (c)  No.  277/94  the  six  writ petitioners therein  are in identical situation and are also entitled to the same treatment as the writ petitioners whose cases have  been decided  in C.A.No. 913 of 1987. Otherwise, it would  be discriminatory,  we hold  that  they  are  also entitled to  the same  pay scale of lecturers above referred to.      In the  result C.A. No. 913 of 1987 is dismissed. Civil Appeals arising  out of Special leave petitions No. 643/1990 and 6864/1984  are allowed. Writ petition No. 277/94 is also allowed in  the manner  mentioned above.  There shall  be no order as  to costs.  We should  not be under stood as having decided any  of the  issues of  law raised  by  the  learned

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 7 of 7  

senior  counsel on both sides.