Gurdial Singh vs S.S.M. College, Dina Nagar

M.L. Singhal, J.—Gurdial Singh, Jagjeewan Kumar and others (Plaintiffs) are Lecturers in S.S.M. College, Dina Nagar. They filed suit for declaration against the Principal, S.S.M. College, Dina Nagar and its management to the effect that they are entitled to the arrears of pay which became accrued to them consequent upon the revision of pay scales with effect from 1.1.1973. They claimed to be entitled to the arrears of pay to be worked out in accordance with the pay fixation formula of DPI (Colleges), Punjab, Chandigarh as per letter No. 1505-1 -EDI 77/7462 dated 25.2.1977 from the date of their joining service upto October, 1977. By way of consequential relief they prayed for a mandatory injunction directing them to release the amount of arrears of pay with interest @ 18% per annum till realisation. Gurdial Singh joined on 16.8.1974. Jagjee-wan kumar joined on 28.7.1973, Sachida Nand joined on 1.8.1973, Jagmohan Kumar Handa joined on 18.7.1973, Satinder Parkash Handa joined on 16.7.1973 Swatantar Murgai joined on 16.7.1973 and Davinder Singh joined on 16.7.1973. In pursuance of the recommendations of the University Grants Commission, the State Government revised the pay scales of the University and College teachers with effect from 1st April, 1975 vide Punjab Government circular dated 20.6.1975, Later on the State Government considered the granting of the revised pay scales with effect from some earlier date. The Governor of Punjab was pleased to grant the revised pay scales to the teaching personnel of the Universities, Government Colleges and Aided Private Affilliated Colleges with effect from 1.1.1973. Plaintiffs were also placed under the revised pay scale of Rs. 700-1600, as against the ear- lier pay scale of Rs. 300-600. As per letter/memo dated 25.2.1977 the arrears of pay accruing to the teaching personnel, was to be deposited in the Government securities in the case of private Colleges. The benefit on account of increase in the additional dearness allowance, to the extent of 50% had to be deposit in terms of Additional Emoluments (Compulsory Deposits), Act, 1974 and the remaining 50% had to be credited to the general provident fund, contributory provident fund or in the Government securities of teachers concerned as the case may be. According to the University conditions for affiliated privately managed Colleges, the management of the concerned College was liable for the payment of the revised pay scales and arrears of pay accruing due on the revision of the pay scales. According to the plaintiffs the defendants failed to comply with letter dated 25.2.1977.

Defendants contested the suit of the plaintiffs. It was urged that vide agreement dated 18.11.1977 entered into between the teaching staff and the management of S.S.M. College, Dina Nagar it was agreed that the management will not pay any arrears of pay with effect from 1.1.1973. College came into existence after July, 1973. Plaintiffs are claiming relief with effect from 1.1.1973. College came into existence in July. 1978, as such letter dated 25.2.1977 is not applicable. Arrears of pay had not been paid to the College by the Government as College was not entitled to the arrears. It was urged that as the College had not received any amount in respect of the alleged arrears from the Government or the University, the plaintiffs are not entitled to the alleged arrears from the defendants.

On these pleadings of the parties, the following issues were framed :-

1) Whether the suit is within limitation ? OPP.

2) Whether the suit is bad for mis-joinderof causes of action? OPP.

3) Whether the suit is not maintainable in the present form? OPD.

4) Whether the plaintiffs are estopped from filing the present suit by their act and conduct ? OPD.

5) Whether the plaintiffs are entitled to arrears of pay from the date of joining ? OPD.

6) Whether the plaintiffs are entitled to any interest ? If so to what amount ? OPD.

7) Relief.

Vide order dated 25.3.1995 Additional Senior Sub Judge, Gurdaspur decreed the plaintiffs suit for declaration that they are entitled to the arrears of pay having accrued to them because of the revision of the pay scales with effect from the date they joined the service upto October, 1977 and by way of mandatory injunction the defendants were directed to get the arrears of pay deposited in the Government securities and the benefit on account of increase in the dearness allowance deposited in terms of Additional Emoluments (Compulsory Deposits) Act, 1974 and credited in their general provident fund, contributory provident fund, Government securities in accordance with crite- ria given in para No. 6 of letter dated 25.2.1977, in view of his findings, that there was an agreement between the teaching staff of this College and the management of this College dated 18.11.1977 according to which it was the duty of the management of this College to have correspondence with DPI Colleges for getting the amount of arrears released for being deposited in the account of the plaintiffs in terms of letter dated 25.2.1977 Ex. P2. It was found that it was the duty of the management of the college to intimate the Government regarding the additional financial liability on account of revision of pay scales and to ask for the release of the arrears of pay for being deposited in accordance with letter Ex. P2 dated 25.2.1977. It was found that as they were not to receive the amount in cash, there was no limitation provided in letter dated 25.2.1977 and the plaintiffs suit could not thus be said to be barred by limitation because the arrears of pay will be deposited in the general provident fund, contributory provident fund, Government securities as and when the same was released by the Government on being asked by the management of the College. No interest was awarded to be paid on the amount of arrears.

Plaintiffs went in appeal as no interest was awarded to them on the amount of arrears. Defendants went in appeal as according to them the plaintiffs'' suit should have been dismissed.

Vide order dated 12.6.1998 Additional District Judge, Gurdaspnr dismissed both the appeals and held that the management of the College must pay arrears to the plaintiffs as ordered by the Court below.

Not satisfied Gurdial Singh and Jagjeewan Ku-mar plaintiffs have come up in further appeal to this Court.

I have heard the learned counsel for the appellants and learned senior counsel for the respondent College-Management.

In view of the recommendations of the University Grants Commission the State Government revised the pay scales of the appellants vide memo dated 25.2.1977 entitling them to receive their salary in the revised pay scales with effect from 1.1.1973. Prior to 1.1.1973, they were in the pay scales of Rs. 300-600. After revision their pay scale was revised to Rs. 700-1600. They were to receive salary in the revised pay scales with effect from 1.1.1973. They were also to receive arrears for the period prior to the date of notification dated 25.2.1977. It was ordered by the Government that 50% of the amount of additional dearness allowance would be deposited under the Additional Emoluments (Compulsory Deposits) Act, 1974 and the remaining 50% would be credited in the general provident fund. Management of the College was liable for depositing the amount. In the case of the appellants, the amount of arrears accrued in view of letter dated 25.2.1977 was not credited in the general provident fund and was also not deposited under the Additional Emoluments (Compulsory Deposits) Act, 1974.

Lecturers Gurdial Singh etc. were invited to re- ceive their arrears as per judgment of the learned trial Court and the management paid them arrears. Gurdial Singh and Jagjeewan Kumar were not paid the arrears as they did not receive the arrears, but filed an appeal against the judgment of the learned trial Court to claim interest on the amount of arrears.

It was submitted by the learned counsel for the appellants that interest should have been awarded to them when they had been held entitled to receive arrears and the management had failed to pay them arrears for quite a long period. Order for the payment of arrears was passed on 25.2.1977. Arrears were not paid to them. They have been approaching the management time and again for payment of arrears to them. They filed suit on 2.6.1989 for claiming arrears which was decreed. Interest should have been allowed on the arrears.

Learned counsel for the management of the College, on the other hand, submitted that after notification dated 25.2.1977 an agreement was entered into between the plaintiffs and the management whereby the plaintiffs had agreed to relinquish their right to arrears for the period that intervened between the date of their appointment till October, 1977. It was submitted that they are bound by the agreement entered into between them and the management and as such were not entitled to receive arrears for the period preceding October, 1977.

Plaintiffs were to be paid salary on receipt of 95% of the money by the management of the College from the Government. It was submitted that the Punjab Government had not paid any money for the period upto 31.8.1979. Shri A.P. Mehta, Principal of the College stated that no amount was paid by the Government for the period 1.1.1973 to 31.8.1979. Learned counsel for the management contended that the management was liable to pay amount only in case it has received the amount from the Government and when it had not received any amount it was not liable to pay any amount to the plaintiffs (Lecturers).

Agreement Ex. P4 was not disputed by the plaintiffs. As per agreement Ex. P4 the plaintiffs had undertaken not to claim arrears for the period upto October, 1977. If the plaintiffs were not paid arrears for the period prior to October, 1977, on account of this agreement, the management cannot be held liable to the arrears for the period 1.1.1973 to 31.10.1977.

Appellants Gurdial Singh and Jagjeewan Kumar had been serving this College as Lecturers since 16.8.1974 and 28.7.1973 respectively. A revision of pay scales took place with effect from 1.1.1973.

Learned senior counsel for the College management submitted that the appellants are not entitled to any interest on the arrears as the College was to contribute only 5% of the arrears while 95% was to be contributed by the Government as it is a College aided by the Government. Suffice it to say after the revision of pay scales had taken place, the management of the College should have perused the matter vigorously with the Government for receiving 95% of the amount of the aid. Appellants are entitled to interest at the rate of 12% per annum on the amount of arrears from the date of suit till they are disbursed to them. Appeal is accordingly allowed to this extent.

Appeal allowed.