1. This petition under Article-226 of the Constitution of India is filed by the petitioner association, seeking direction to the respondents to make the payment of arrears of salary on the basis of 'Mehrotra Pay Commission Recommendations' with effect from 01.01.1986 to 14.10.1990, with interest at the rate of 18 per cent, from the date such amount fell due.
2. The case of the petitioners is that the University Grants Commission appointed Mehrotra Pay Commission for reviewing the pay-scales of the teachers of University as well as the teachers of the colleges affiliated to the University. The pay commission vide its recommendations, revised the pay-scales of the teachers working in the various colleges affiliated with the Gujarat University.
It is the case of the petitioners that they being part-time lecturers, working in the law colleges, have been illegally denied benefits of revised pay-scale. They are entitled to same pay-scale, which has been given to the full time teachers working in University and affiliated colleges, dealing with the other subjects.
3. After notice, the State has contested the claim of the petitioners by way of filing affidavit, wherein it has been stated that the part-time law professors and teachers are not entitled to the difference of pay-scale, as claimed by the petitioners' organization, because part-time professors and teachers are not covered by the recommendations of Mehrotra Pay Commission. It is, further, their stand that vide resolution dated 14.09.1988 and 19.03.1991 and the Education Department, Government of Gujarat has decided to revise the pay-scales, as recommended by the Mehrotra Pay Commission, but, the same was not extended to the part-time law teachers as they are not working in a fixed pay- scale.
4. While arguing on behalf of the petitioners, it has been submitted that there is nothing in the Mehrotra Pay Commission report that the part-time teachers are not entitled to the revised pay-scales. However, the respondent- State, arbitrarily, has denied these benefits to the petitioners, which has been given to the other part-time professors of arts, science and commerce colleges. According to him, this amounts to discrimination in salary, and hence, the Courts is required to interfere in exercise of powers of writ of mandamus under Article-226 of the Constitution of India.
5. On the other hand, learned AGP has referred to the circular issued by the State Government, dated 14.09.1988, wherein, in Para- 17, the pay-scale of the lecturers, readers and professors, working in a fixed pay-scale of Rs.2200-4000, Rs.3000-5000, Rs.4500-5700 respectively is shown. Relying on the same, it has been submitted that as the part-time lecturers are not working in a fixed scale and are not under full-time employment, they cannot be given the benefits of revised pay-scale, as per the recommendations of the Mehrotra Pay Commission.
6. Having considered the rival contentions of both the sides, I am not able to find out why the benefits of Mehrotra Pay Commission Recommendations given to the full-time lecturers has been denied to the petitioners. This is, particularly, so when the petitioners have been given this benefit from 14.10.1990. I am of the considered opinion that the petitioners cannot be denied these benefits from 01.01.1986 to 14.10.1990, when they are given these benefits, after 1990.
It will be relevant to note that the University Grants Commission has also recommended the case of the part-time lecturers to the Government, however, the same remained pending with the government and ultimately that recommendation has been denied.
7. Learned AGP is not able to deny the fact that the part-time professors of arts, science and commerce colleges have been given the benefit of Mehrotra Pay Commission. It is also brought to my notice that, earlier, lecturers working in the law colleges were denied this benefit. However, later on vide decision dated 03.09.1992, rendered in special Civil Application No.1919 of 1992, this Court issued directions to the respondents to grant benefit of arrears to the lecturers/teachers of law colleges, as per the recommendations of the Mehrotra Pay Commission. As the benefits of recommendations of this Commission is being given to the part-time lecturers working in other subjects there is no reason to deny the same to the present petitioners.
8. In view of the above-said discussion, respondents are DIRECTED to pay the difference in arrears of salary, as per the recommendations made by the Mehrotra Pay Commission, minus actual salary paid to the petitioners from 01.01.1986 to 14.10.1990, within a period of ONE MONTH from the date of receipt of copy of this order. The petitioners, further, will be entitled to interest at the rate of TWELVE per cent from the date such arrears fell due. However, there shall be no order as to costs. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent.
(MOHINDER PAL,J.) Umesh/