Disposed

Sharmila & Ors. v. State of Haryana & Ors.

Punjab & Haryana HC21 May 2012CWP/9536/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a constitutional petition, teachers petitioned for revised remuneration equal to Guest Faculty Lecturers performing identical duties. The Court disposed of the matter without adjudicating merits, directing authorities to decide the legal notice within three months.

What did the court decide?

Directed the Commissioner and Director General School Education, Haryana, to consider and decide the legal notice filed by petitioners within three months of receipt.

Sharmila & Ors. Vs State of Haryana… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Punjab & Haryana HC (2012)

¶1

CWP No. 9536 of 2012 1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.

¶3

CWP No. 9536 of 2012

¶4

Date of Decision : May 21, 2012

Sharmila and others

.... PETITIONERS

Vs.

State of Haryana and others

¶9

..... RESPONDENTS

¶10

CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH

¶11

Present : Ms. Alka Chatrath, Advocate, for the petitioners.

¶12

AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH, J. (ORAL)

¶13

Petitioners have approached this Court claiming the remuneration at par with the Lecturers working as Guest Faculty in the Haryana Education Department, which has been revised from time to time but the same benefit has not been granted to the petitioners despite the fact they also are working as Lecturer in English with the Department of Education now.

¶14

Petitioners, in pursuance to an advertisement, applied for the post of Language Teacher (English) under the Haryana Industrial Training Vocational Education Department Field Officers 'Group C'

¶15

CWP No. 9536 of 2012

¶16

¶17

Service Rules, 1998. They possessed the qualification prescribed for the post of Lecturer and thereafter now they have been designated as Lecturer in English as per letter dated 27.02.2008. Petitioners were initially appointed as Language Teachers on 06.11.2007. They continued to serve with the Directorate of Industrial Training and Vocational Education but on 06.05.2010, a decision was taken by the Director, Hayana Secondary Education directing the District Education Officer for engaging Vocational Lecturers on D.C. rates in the Vocational Education Department due to transfer of Vocational Education to the School Education, Haryana from the Directorate of Technical Education and Vocational Training Department. In pursuance to the said decision, petitioners were given appointment as Lecturer in English and were adjusted in Schools and they are performing the same duties and functions as Guest Faculty Lecturers. Time to time the remuneration of the Guest Faculty Lecturers has been revised but the petitioners are being paid the fixed remuneration of Rs. 12,500/- which was initially fixed at the time of their appointment. As the petitioners are performing the same duties and functions as Lecturers in English and possess the qualifications prescribed for appointment to the said post, are entitled to the same remuneration as other Guest Faculty Lecturers on the principle of 'equal pay for equal work'.

¶18

Claiming the said benefit, petitioners have served a legal notice dated 05.07.2011 (Annexure P-7) upon the respondents but till date, no decision thereon has been taken and as a matter of fact, vide letter dated 08.12.2011 (Annexure P-8), remuneration of Guest

¶19

CWP No. 9536 of 2012

¶20

¶21

Faculty Lecturers has been further revised to Rs. 19440/-.

¶22

Counsel for the petitioners contends that the petitioners, at this stage, would be satisfied if a direction is issued to the Commissioner and Director General School Education, Haryanarespondent No. 2 to consider and decide the legal notice dated 05.07.2011 (Annexure P-7) within some specified time.

¶23

Without going into the merits of the case or commenting thereon, the present petition is disposed of with directions to the Commissioner and Director General School Education, Haryanarespondent No. 2 to consider and decide the legal notice dated 05.07.2011 (Annexure P-7) within a period of three months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. The decision so taken be conveyed to the petitioners forthwith. In case, the petitioners are held entitled to the claim made by them through their legal notice, the consequential benefits, if any, be released to them, in accordance with law, within a further period of two months.

¶24

(AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH ) JUDGE

¶25

May 21, 2012 pj

¶26

CWP No. 9536 of 2012 4

Sharmila & Ors. v. State of Haryana & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sharmila & Ors. v. State of Haryana & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Anita Vs State of Haryana

Nirvail Singh Vs State of Punjab

Dilbagh Singh Vs State of Punjab and Another

Satbir Singh Vs State of Haryana and Others

Shree Dutt Vs State of Haryana and Ors.

Satbir Singh Vs State of Haryana & Ors.