JUDGMENT Ashok Bhushan, J.
1. Heard Shri V.K. Singh, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Shri N.P. Pandey, learned standing counsel appearing for the respondents. Counter and rejoinder affidavits have been exchanged and with the consent of the parties, the writ petition is being finally decided.
2. By this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for quashing order dated 26.8.1999 passed by Regional Inspectress of Girls School rejecting the representation of the petitioner claiming fixation of salary in the L.T grade. A writ of mandamus has also been sought directing the respondent No. 2 to pay the salary to the petitioner along with arrears with effect from 1.1.1986 in L.T grade.
3. Brief facts for deciding the writ petition are; the petitioner was appointed vide appointment letter dated 31.10.1973 in B.T.C grade in the Primary Section of Indian Girls Inter College, Allahabad. The appointment of the petitioner was also approved by the Regional Inspectress of Girls School vide order dated 18.12.1973. The petitioner claimed entitlement for C.T grade from 1.11.1978 after completion of five years in B.T.C grade. The claim of the petitioner for grant of C.T grade was denied by the order of Regional Inspectress of Girls School dated 23.3.1987. The petitioner filed a writ petition No. 14469 of 1987 claiming entitlement of grant of C.T grade. The case of the petitioner was contested in the writ petition. The writ petition of the petitioner was allowed vide judgment of this Court dated 7.2.1990. The claim of the petitioner to be treated into C.T grade with effect from 1.5.1980 was allowed. Operative portion of the judgment is as follows:
Of course, whatever amount has been paid to the petitioner with effect from 1.5.1980 will be adjustable. The arrears shall be paid to the petitioner within a period of four months from the date of presentation of a certified copy of this order by the petitioner before the Regional Inspectress. The arrears will include the salary etc. of the petitioner for the month of May, 1990. The respondents shall commence 'paying the salary to the petitioner as lady teacher in the C.T grade with all the increments etc. from the month of June, 1990 will become payable in the month of July, 90.
With these directions, this petition is disposed of finally.
The petitioner is entitled to her costs.
4. There is no dispute after the judgment of this Court dated 7.2.1990, the petitioner has been granted C.T grade from 1.5.1980 and was paid salary in C.T grade thereafter. Petitioner claims entitlement for grant of L.T grade with effect from 1.1.1986. The representations were submitted by the petitioner for fixation of salary in the L.T grade in pursuance of the Government Order dated 19.10.1989 and the order dated 2.12.1989. The judgment of this Court in Smt. Aruna Ghosh v. State of U.P. in Writ Petition No. 16360 of 1991 decided on 8.2.1995 was also relied. Petitioner ultimately filed a writ petition No. 14176 of 1991 for claiming fixation in the L.T. grade. The said writ petition was disposed of by this Court on 21.5.1999 directing the Regional Inspectress of Girls School to decide the representation, the Regional Inspectress of Girls School passed an order dated 26.8.1999 rejecting the representation of the petitioner. Two reasons were given in the order by Regional Inspectress of Girls School for refusing the grant of L.T grade. It has been stated in the order that from the Government Order dated 19.10.1989 it is clear that teachers are entitled for grant of L.T grade after 10 years of service. It has further been stated that teachers working in the Primary Schools which are attached with High School and Intermediate Colleges are not entitled for B.T.C /C.T/L.T grade. This writ petition has been filed challenging the said order.
5. Shri V.K. Singh, learned Counsel for the petitioner challenging the order contended that view taken by the Regional Inspectress of Girls School that teachers working in the Primary Institution which are attached with High School/Intermediate Colleges are not entitled for grant of B.T.C./C.T/L.T grade is clearly in teeth of earlier judgment of this Court in writ petition No. 14469 of 1987 of the petitioner herself. It is further contended that petitioner is entitled for fixation of L.T grade after completion of 10 years satisfactory service as clarified by order of the Director of Education dated 2.12.1989.
6. Shri N.P. Pandey learned standing counsel has supported the impugned order and has reiterated the grounds taken in the order. The learned standing counsel however, has not been, apart from the reasons mentioned in the order, able to point out any other reason which disentitled the petitioner from grant of the L.T grade.
7. I have considered the submissions of the learned Counsel for the parties and perused the record. Between the parties, there is a final judgment of a Division Bench of this Court dated 7.2.1990 copy of which judgment has been filed as annexure-3. By the said judgment this Court has taken the view that petitioner was entitled for grant of C.T grade with effect from 1.5.1980. The State of U.P has also filed special leave petition against the said judgment which too has been dismissed on 31.1.1991. In the Division Bench judgment of this Court above mentioned the C.T grade has been granted to the petitioner on the basis of petitioner's having been appointed in B.T.C grade in the Primary Section attached to Intermediate College. This Court having already taken the view that the petitioner who was B.T.C grade teacher in Primary Section was entitled for grant of C.T grade, it is not open for the Regional Inspectress of Girls School to take the view that teachers working in the Primary School attached to High School/Intermediate College are not entitled to B.T.C/C.T/L.T grade. The said reasoning of the Regional Inspectress of Girls School is clearly in teeth of the above judgment of this Court and has to be strongly disapproved.
8. The next reason which is not expressly stated to be a reason for denial, but it has been stated in the order that according to the Government Order dated 19.10.1989 L.T grade can be given after 10 years of service. The said issue as to when a C.T grade teacher is entitled to be granted L.T grade has been considered by this Court in Smt. Aruna's Ghosh (supra) in which case this Court considered the Government Order dated 19.10.1989 as well as subsequent order of the Director of Education dated 2.12.1989. This Court took the view that the C.T grade teachers are entitled for fixation in L.T grade after 10 years of satisfactory service out of which 5 years should be as C.T grade teacher. Another subsequent judgment of this Court in Shakuntala Shukla's case reported in 1995 AWC 89 again reiterated the same view. Following observations was made by this Court in Shakuntala Shukla's case.
4... But the impugned order in so far as it holds that the petitioner would be entitled to L.T. Grade with effect from 1.7.90 i.e., after completion of 10 years' continuous satisfactory service in C.T. grade, is to my mind, founded on misreading and is contrary to the intendment of the G.O. aforesaid. What is required in order to qualify for L.T. grade in accordance with the G.O. afore-stated is to have five years service in C.T. Grade and 10 years overall satisfactory service. The words satisfactory service' (Santosh Janak Seva) occurring in G.O. aforesaid. In my opinion, include the service rendered by the petitioner in J.T.C. grade as well. 10 years' satisfactory service within the meaning of the G.O. aforesaid cannot be circumscribed to service rendered in C.T. Grade alone. That is how I have construed the G.O. aforesaid, which amended an earlier G.O. dated 19.10.1989, in writ petition No. 16360 of 1991 Smt. Aruna Ghosh v. State of U.P. and Ors. decided on 8.2.1995. I am of the view that on a proper construction of the G.O. aforesaid, the petitioner would be entitled to get L.T. grade on completion of 5 years' service in C.T. grade and 10 years overall satisfactory service after the institution was upgraded to the level of High School. The impugned order, therefore, deserve to be modified to that extent.
9. Recently, I have also taken the same view in the judgment dated 13.2.2006 in writ petition No. 39731 of 2000.
10. Taking into consideration the aforesaid fact and above view of the matter the order of the Regional Inspectress of Girls School cannot be sustained. The reasons given in the order for refusing grant of salary in the L.T grade cannot be sustained. At this stage, it is also relevant to advert one more reason given in the counter affidavit. It has been stated in the counter affidavit that petitioner was not promoted in C.T grade and she does not hold the C.T grade substantially and unless there is vacancy in the L.T grade petitioner is not entitled for L.T grade. The said stand has been taken in paragraph 8 & 13.
11. In the present case, the petitioner's claim was for fixation of salary in accordance with the Government Order. The Court was neither called upon to consider the promotion or entitlement to hold the post. Under the Chapter III Regulation 42 of the U.P Intermediate Education Act the employees and teacher of aided Institutions are entitled to receive salary as fixed by State Government from time to time. The entitlement of teachers to receive salary flow from the government orders issued from time to time. In the present case, petitioner was claiming entitlement for fixation of salary. It is not necessary to even examine as to whether there was C.T grade post on which petitioner was granted C.T grade and further there are L.T grade post. It is not a case seeking promotion from C.T grade to L.T. grade. The promotion from C.T grade to L.T grade is governed by Rules and Regulations. The requirement of vacancy is necessary when question of promotion is considered. I am not concerned in this case with regard to promotion in L.T grade, hence the vacancy existence or non existence is not relevant for purposes of present case. Thus the grounds taken in the counter affidavit also do not substantiate the plea taken by the State in denying the claim of the petitioner. It is relevant to note that in the order passed by Regional Inspectress of Girls School, it has not been stated that services of the petitioner are not satisfactory. The entitlement under the Government Order to get salary is based on satisfactory completion of 10 years of service. The petitioner having admittedly completed 10 years service on 1.1.1986, she is clearly entitled for fixation of salary in L.T grade from 1.1.1986. Consequently the writ petition is allowed. The order dated 26.8.1999 annexure- 9 to the writ petition is quashed. A writ of mandamus is issued to the respondent to treat the petitioner in L.T grade with effect from 1.1.1986 and fix her salary accordingly. The petitioner is entitled to all her consequential benefits. The respondents are directed to pay arrears of salary within a period of six months from the date of production of a certified copy of this order.
12. The writ petition is allowed accordingly.