(9) The main emphasis which has been tried to be made by learned counsel for the petitioners side is that the earlier decisions delivered by the Court in the afore-mentioned petitions are not being maintained by the State authority, but for that purpose, independent action appears to have been taken by filing a contempt of Court proceeding and as such, the Court would not like to express any opinion on such issue. However, while going through the decisions delivered by the Court in the aforementioned petitions, it is basically found that SUO-MOTU proceedings were initiated by the Division Bench of this Court on the basis of the news items published, projecting the problems being faced by the teachers who are dealing with physically challenged children. Those teachers used to get salary and allowances from the Education Department, but there was no rule or regulation prescribed and though they were getting salaries regularly, the benefits, like provident fund, pension, allowances were not given to them. So much so that the Court had also taken note of the situation that the female teachers are not getting maternity leave and teachers were being exploited by the school management and despite the repeated grievances voiced out by way of representations, no attention was paid and as such, the proceedings were taken up by the Court. In addition to that, it was also noticed by the Division Bench that these teachers were not permanently appointed by the respective NGOs and as such, basically, while examining the plight of such specialized teachers, the Court had gone into the objectives of the policy and in that context, the observations are made. Now, the grievance of the petitioners that such observations and the spirit contained therein have not been maintained by the State authorities, it was informed to the Court that Contempt of Court proceedings are pending
