Union of India (UOI) vs Central Administrative Tribunal by Registrar, Madras Bench, The Secondary Grade Teachers Federation and R. Mohandoss

Elipe Dharma Rao, J.—Aggrieved by the order of The Central Administrative Tribunal, Madras Bench dated 28.11.2002 passed in OA.

No. 439/2002 filed by the respondents 2 to 4 herein, challenging the notification No. 3025/Edn/Estt-II/D/2001 dated 9.1.2002 issued by the

Petitioner herein and to direct the Petitioner herein to upgrade all the educationally qualified Secondary Grade Teachers to the post of School

Assistant Grade II without insisting on qualifying 3 years of service, quashing the impugned order in the said OA, whereby the claim of the

applicants therein for upgradation was rejected, and directing the respondent therein to consider the case of the applicants for upgradation in

accordance with the letter dated 7.11.2000 issued by the Government of India, Ministry of Human Resources Development and to pass orders

within a period of two months from that day, this Writ Petition has been filed.

2.The case of the respondents 2 to 5 herein/applicants in the said OA as put forward before the Tribunal is as follows:

The applicants are Secondary Grade Teachers in various Schools in Pondicherry and the Secondary Grade Teachers were handling Classes VI to

VIII in Middle/Higher/Higher Secondary Schools in the Union Territory of Pondicherry. In the Seventees, the Secondary Grade Teachers were

recruited with reference to SSLC and Teacher Training Certification qualification. In the year 1978, the Recruitment Rules were amended. As per

the amended Recruitment Rules, 20% of the vacancies are to be filled up from Graduates and 80% from those who possess SSLC/Teacher

Training Certificates. In 1987, the proportion of Graduates was hiked upto 80% from 20% and in 1992, it was brought down to 75%. Thereafter,

there was a litigation before the Tribunal in OA. No. 879/1994 filed with regard to higher pay scale by the Graduate Teachers, who were recruited

as Secondary Grade Teachers. In the mean while, various Teachers Associations were also making representations to the Government for

upgrading the post of Secondary Grade Teachers in the Middle/High/Higher Secondary Schools to that of School Assistant Grade II and filling up

of those vacancies by way of upgradation. The Government of Pondicherry decided to replace the Secondary Grade Teachers, who were handling

classes VI to VIII in the Middle/High/Higher Secondary Schools by School Assistants Grade II on par with the Delhi Administration. The

Government of Pondicherry assessed the requirement for the same at 1014. There were already 167 School Assistant Grade II posts in existence

and therefore, the requirement of School Assistant posts was determined at 847. Accordingly, proposals were submitted to the Department of

Secondary Education and Higher Education in the Ministry of Human Resources Development of the Government of India, which sent a letter

dated 7.11.2000 to the Secretary of Education, Pondicherry approving the upgradation of 847 posts of Secondary Grade Teachers to the School

Assistant Grade II in the Union Territory of Pondicherry, with a condition that only those Secondary Grade Teachers, who possess the

qualifications prescribed for School Assistant Grade II may be placed in the Higher Scale. Accordingly, a notification was issued to that effect that

out of the 847 upgraded posts, 576 upgradations were made from among the Secondary Grade Teachers to School Assistant Grade II Teachers

and nearly 120 Secondary Grade Teachers, who were qualified and available, were not upgraded. Thereafter, when the representations were

made by the said Teachers through the Association, they were informed that they were not entitled for upgradation, since they have not completed

three years of regular service in that post for being considered for promotion to the post of School Assistant Grade II. The same was challenged

by the respondents 2 to 4 in the said OA on various grounds.

Before the Tribunal, the Petitioner herein filed a reply affidavit, contending that the applicants are not entitled for upgradation, since they have not

completed three years of service to get the benefit of upgradation and that 721 posts were upgraded and the remaining 126 posts were to be filled

up by accommodating the Secondary Grade Teachers, who are possessing Degree qualification in the required discipline and after their attaining

the required three years of service in the present post of Secondary Grade Teachers, which is a pre-requisite for promotion to the post of School

Assistant Grade II as per the existing Recruitment Rules in force and that the principle of upgradation applicable only to Secondary Grade

Teachers, who posses the requisite educational qualification and length of service and are placed in the upgraded posts of School Assistant Grade

II for taking classes in the relevant subjects.

The Tribunal, on consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case and the material records placed before it and on consideration of the

stand of the Government of India that the notification was not issued for the said upgradation of 847 posts, but it was issued only to fill up 85

vacancies in the disciplines of English and Mathematics, held that the applicants/ respondents 2 to 4 herein are entitled to succeed and directed the

respondent therein to consider the case of the applicants for upgradation in accordance with the letter dated 7.11.2000 issued by the Government

of India, Ministry of Human Resources Development and pass orders within a period of two months from that day.

This Court heard the submissions of the learned Counsel on either side at length, who raised the same contentions as raised before the Tribunal

and also perused the material records.

As per the notification, which is impugned in the present OA, it is made clear that the 85 Posts of School Assistant Grade II does not form part

of the 847 posts, which were approved by the Government of India for upgradation, but, as far as the promotion or upgradation as sought for by

the applicants in the present OA is concerned, it is relevant to refer to Clause 12 of the Recruitment Rules, which reads as under:

In case of Recruitment by promotion/ deputation/transfer, grades from which promotion/ deputation/transfer is to be made:

Promotion from Secondary Grade Teachers and all categories of Teachers equivalent to Secondary Grade Teachers:

(i) Satisfying the subject requirements as detailed in the table below and also the language (medium of instruction) requirements of the post to which

promotion is made and

(ii) Having three years of regular service in the post.

As far as the applicants in this case are concerned, though they are having the qualification as per Clause 12(i) of the said Recruitment Rules,

they are not having the qualification of three years of regular service in the post as per Clause 12(ii), as they were promoted in the year 2004 only

and therefore, they are not eligible for upgradation as sought for by them.

But, the Division Bench of this Court by order dated 5.10.2004 in WP. No. 31152/2003 passed in similar circumstances, stated that there are

two requisite qualifications required, viz. (1) qualification and (2) experience and that the upgradation is to be made as per the eligibility of the

applicant on the basis of the educational qualification and experience.

Applying the said ratio of the Division Bench of this Court to the facts and circumstances of the case on hand, the applicants in this case are

eligible upgradation only by way of promotion along with the educational qualification and on satisfying the subject requirements as detailed in the

table mentioned in the said Recruitment Rules and also the language (medium of instruction) requirements of the post to which promotion is made

and by having three years of regular service in the post.

As on the date of upgradation of earlier batch of Teachers, the applicants herein were not having qualification of three years of regular service

in the post as per the Clause 12(ii) of the Recruitment Rules. Moreover, the Tribunal has also directed the respondents therein to consider the case

of the applicants in accordance with the said Recruitment Rules and the letter dated 7.11.2000 issued by the Government of India. Therefore,

considering eligibility criteria prescribed under the said Recruitment Rules, particularly the Clause 12 and also the judgement of the Division Bench

of this Court referred to above, it is directed that the case of Petitioner can be considered as per the eligibility criteria as stated in the said

Recruitment Rules.

11.With the above observations, this Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs.