High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Case Law Search
Shri Krishna Kumar Singh v. State Of U.P. & Others - WRIT - A No. 32359 of 2001  RD-AH 8990 (4 May 2006)
Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 32359 of 2001
Shri Krishna Kumar Singh
State of U.P.and others
The petitioner was appointed as Assistant Superintendent Physical Education in Gorakhpur University . He was subsequently promoted as Superintendent Physical Education w.e.f. 1.4.1971. He has since retired from service. The petitioner made representation to the Chancellor of Deen Dayal Upadhyay Gorakhpur University for being given pay scale of lecturer from the date of his initial appointment and also for selection grade with effect from the date he completed sixteen years of service. It is stated that the Vice Chancellor Gorakhpur University by his decision dated 30.3.1972 had granted lecturer's pay scale to the petitioner w.e.f. 1.4.1971 which was duly approved by the Executive Council of the University vide resolution dated 19.8.1972. However, the petitioner was paid the said pay scale from 1.4.1971 upto December 1973 where after the same was stopped in view of a direction dated 15.12.1973 issued by the State Government. The matter was then referred to the Government and the direction dated 15.12.1973 was duly cancelled on 18.5.1990. By government order dated 11.9.1984 the persons imparting physical education were granted pay scale of lecturers. However, in the case of the petitioner he was being paid at a lower pay scale inspite of the said government order. A number of physical instructors had filed Writ Petitions seeking pay scale of lecturers and for fixation of their salary as per government order dated 11.9.1984 and the writ petitions were finally decided by this Court whereby they became entitled to the same benefits of the lecturer grade and selection grade by completing required number of years of service. It is contended that the representation of the petitioner has been rejected by the Chancellor on the ground that the petitioner was being paid pay scale of Superintendent Physical Education and therefore, he was not entitled to the pay scale applicable to lecturer.
Learned counsel fort the petitioner submits that the controversy with respect to entitlement of persons imparting Physical Education in colleges to the pay scale of lecturers has been finally settled in Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 1242 (SB) of 1994 (N.P. Singh and others Vs. State of U.P.and others). Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 5889 of 1982 (Vishnu Raj Kumar Vs. State of U.P.and others) Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 167 (SB) of 1995 , Rama Kant Misra Vs. State of U.P. and others) , Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 74 (SB) of 1999 (P.N.Rana Versus State of U.P. and others) . It is stated that against the judgment in the case of Vishnu Raj Kumar (Supra) ,the State had filed Special Leave Petition before the Hon'ble Supreme Court which had been dismissed on 5.4.1991. The judgment dated 31.1.1997 passed in the case of N.P.Singh (Supra) has not been challenged by the State and therefore, it has become final. In the aforesaid cases this Court considered the definition of the word ''Teacher" and came to the conclusion that Superintendent Physical Education also imparts instructions in the field of Physical Education hence they would be deemed to be teachers. Therefore, to remove any sort of anomaly the State Government issued orders to re-designate and also provided that they would be entitled to the pay scale admissible to lecturer grade with effect from the date they were appointed as Superintendent Physical Education.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has also referred to the judgment dated 3.8.2000 of this Court given in Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 704 (SB) of 1999 ( P.N.Rana) Supra , and has contended that this Court had issued a mandamus in general to the State Government to give benefit to all Instructors/Superintendents who have been given the designation of lecturer subsequently. He submits that inspite of such directions, respondents are not giving the benefit to the petitioner .
It is not in dispute by the respondents that the petitioner was working as Superintendent Physical Education and his appointment had been duly approved by the Vice Chancellor. In view of the aforesaid facts and decision of this court, the petitioner is entitled to the pay scale as revised from time to time of lecturer from the date of his appointment as Superintendent Physical Education as also to the selection grade to which he would be entitled upon completing the prescribed period of service. The impugned order dated 23.6.2001 Annexure-8 to the writ petition is quashed. The writ petition stands allowed. The respondents are directed to calculate the amount taking into consideration the pay scale already granted to the petitioner and to pay the arrears within four months from the date a certified copy of this order is produced before them. No order is passed as to costs.
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.