Keraleeya Samajam vs Pratibha Dattatray Kulkarni … on 1 October, 2021

caselaws.org

Supreme Court of India
Keraleeya Samajam vs Pratibha Dattatray Kulkarni … on 1 October, 2021Author: M.R. Shah

Bench: M.R. Shah, A.S. Bopanna

REPORTABLE

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

Special Leave Petition (C) No.21660­21661 of 2019

Keraleeya Samajam & Anr. ..Petitioner(S)

VERSUS

Pratibha Dattatray Kulkarni (Dead)
through LRs & Ors. ..Respondent(S)

JUDGMENT

M.R. Shah, J.

1. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned

judgment and order dated 28.06.2019 in Writ Petition No.5311 of

2011 and Writ Petition No.5338 of 2000 passed by the High Court

of Judicature at Bombay, the management has preferred the

present special leave petitions. By the impugned common judgment
Signature Not Verified

Digitally signed by R
Natarajan
Date: 2021.10.04

and order the High Court has declared that the entitlement of the
16:09:36 IST
Reason:

original petitioners is to receive wages in pay scales as per Schedule
1
– C to the Maharashtra Employees of Private Schools (Condition of

Service) Regulation Rules, 1981. Thereafter, the Division Bench has

disposed of the said writ petitions issuing a direction to the Deputy

Director (Education) to see that the teachers working with the

petitioners school are received their wages and salaries accordingly.

The High Court has also not accepted the submissions on behalf of

the petitioner to restrict arrears to three years preceding the filing of

the writ petition.

2. At the outset, it is required to be noted that in the order dated

21.10.2019, this court recorded the submissions on behalf of the

petitioners that the petitioners are ready to pay the arrears as per

6th Pay Commission for the preceding three years prior to the filing

of the writ petition. Thereafter this court passed the following order

on 04.11.2019:­

“Being aggrieved by the impugned order of
the High Court directing the petitioners­
Institution to pay the arrears of salary as per the
Fifth and Sixth Pay Commissions to the teaching
and non­teaching staff of the second petitioner­
School (said to be unaided school) the petitioners
have filed these special leave petitions.

We have heard Mr. Shekhar Napahade,
learned senior counsel, assisted by Ms. Bina

2
Madhavan, learned counsel appearing for the
petitioners who has submitted that the
petitioners are ready to pay arrears as per the
Sixth Pay Commission for the preceding three
years prior to the filing of the writ petition.

On the above submission, the petitioner to
file the calculation memo as arrears of the
amount payable to the teaching and non­
teaching staff.

Accordingly, the petitioners have filed
calculation memo as per which the amount
towards the salary for three years preceding the
filing of writ petition (Sixth Pay Commission),
Rs.1,49,13,459/­ is payable.

So far as the total arrears towards Fifth Pay
Commission an amount of Rs.1,19,96,967/­ is
payable. Insofar as the Sixth Pay Commission an
amount of Rs.5,34,50,719/­ is stated to be the
arrears payable. Thus the total arrear as per
Fifth and Six Pay Commissions is
Rs.6,54,47,686/­ (Rs.1,19,96,967/­ +
Rs.5,34,50,719/­) and out of the said amount
50% works out to Rs.3,27,23,843/­.

Mr. Shekhar Napahde, learned senior
counsel, has submitted that the second
petitioner being unaided school may not be in a
position to deposit the entire amount.
Considering the submission made at the Bar,
there shall be an interim stay of the operation of
the impugned order on condition that the
petitioner shall deposit 50% of the total amount
which works out to Rs.3,27,23,843/­ within a
period of eight weeks failing which the interim
stay granted by this Court shall be automatically

3
 vacated. The deposit of the above amount shall
be without prejudice to the contention of the
petitioners in the matter.

On such deposit, the amount of
Rs.3,27,23,843/­ shall be disbursed to the
teaching and non­teaching staff of the second
petitioner­school and other employees who are
held entitled to get arrears as per the orders of
the High Court.

Issue notice.”

That thereafter a further order dated 29.01.2020 came to be passed

by this court, which reads as under:­

“In compliance of Order dated 04.11.2019
the petitioners ­ Institution has deposited the
amount of Rs.3,27,23,843/­ (Rupees three crore
twenty seven lakhs twenty three thousand eight
hundred forty three) in the Registry of the
Supreme Court. As per the said order the
amount is to be disbursed to the teaching & non­
teaching staff and the other employees of the
second petitioner­Model English School who are
entitled to get the arrears as per Order of the
High Court.

Ms. Bina Madhavan, learned counsel
appearing for the petitioners and Mr. Akshay
Girish Ringe & Mr. Bhaskar Y. Kulkarni, learned
counsel appearing for the respondents, have
agreed that the amount so deposited before this
Court be disbursed to the teaching & non­
teaching staff and the other employees of the
second petitioner­Model English School through

4
Deputy Director of Education, Education
Department, State of Maharashtra.

In view of above, the Registry is directed to
transmit the amount of Rs.3,27,23,843/­
(Rupees three crore twenty seven lakhs twenty
three thousand eight hundred forty three) to
Deputy Director of Education, Education
Department, State of Maharashtra, either
through RTGS or by Pay Order at the earliest.

Ms. Bina Madhavan, learned counsel
appearing for the petitioners­Institution, shall
furnish the details of the bank account of the
Deputy Director of Education, Education
Department, State of Maharashtra, to the
Registry of this Court within a period of two days
from today.

The Deputy Director of Education, Education
Department, State of Maharashtra, is directed to
identify the teaching, non­teaching staff and
other employees of the second petitioner­Model
English School who are entitled to receive the
arrears as per order of the High Court and
thereafter disburse the said amount
proportionately as per arrears on proper receipt.
The Deputy Director of Education, Education
Department, State of Maharashtra, shall
complete the exercise of disbursement of the said
amount within four weeks from today.
We make it clear that the disbursement of
the said amount shall be without prejudice to the
contentions of the petitioners and the
respondents. Matter be listed in the last week of
April 2020.”

5
3. Therefore the entitlement of the teacher’s salaries as per the

5th and 6th Pay Commission to the teaching and non­teaching staff

of the second petitioner – school is not required to gone into and

only issue which is required to be considered is whether the arrears

ought to have been restricted to three years preceding the filing of

the writ petition?

4. Having heard Shri Shekhar Naphade, learned Senior Advocate

appearing on behalf of the petitioners and learned counsel

appearing on behalf of the respondents and considering orders

passed in earlier round of litigations which ended up to this court

the liability of the management to pay the salaries to the teaching

and non­teaching staff as per the 4th Pay Commission and 5th Pay

Commission ended in favour of the teaching and non­teaching staff

working with the petitioners. Therefore as and when the 6 th Pay

Commission recommendations was made applicable as such it was

the duty cast upon the petitioners’ institution to pay the

salary/wages to the teaching and non­teaching staff as per the

applicable pay scale as per the 6 th Pay Commission

recommendation and for which the staff was not required to move

6
before the Deputy Director (Education) again and again. Therefore,

the submissions on behalf of the petitioners that as the

respondents approached the Deputy Director (Education)

subsequently and therefore the question with respect to the

limitation will come into play and therefore the respondents shall be

entitled to the arrears of last three years preceding the filing of the

writ petitions cannot be accepted.

5. The respondents were compelled to approach the Deputy

Director only when the petitioners though were required to pay the

wages as per the applicable rules and as per the recommendation of

6th Pay Commission, failed to make the payment, the respondents

were compelled to approach the Deputy Director (Education)

thereafter. Therefore for the lapse and inaction on the part of the

petitioners, the respondents cannot be made to suffer and deny the

arrears of the salaries as per the 6th Pay Commission

recommendation, which otherwise they are entitled to. Every time

the teachers were not supposed to approach the appropriate

authority for getting the benefit as and when there is a revision of

pay as per the pay commission recommendations.

7
 In view of the above and for the reasons stated above both

these special leave petitions deserve to be dismissed and

accordingly dismissed.

It is directed to the petitioners to clear the arrears within a

period of eight weeks from today failing which it shall carry interest

at 9 %. The Deputy Director (Education), Nasik Division is hereby

directed to see that the present order is complied with by the

petitioners and the amount is disbursed to the respective

respondents by account payee cheques.

…………………………………J.
(M. R. SHAH)

…………………………………J.
(A. S. BOPANNA)
New Delhi,
October 1, 2021

8