State of Punjab and Others Vs. Harbans Singh Gill
EmailAppeal: Civil Appeal No. 3917 of 1998
(With C.A. No. 3921/98 and C.A. No. 3918-3920/98)
Petitioner: State of Punjab and Others
Respondent: Harbans Singh Gill
Apeal: Civil Appeal No. 3917 of 1998
(With C.A. No. 3921/98 and C.A. No. 3918-3920/98)
Judges: V.N. KHARE & S.N. PHUKAN, JJ.
Date of Judgment: Apr 27, 2000
Head Note:
SERVICE AND LABOUR LAW
Constitution
Articles 226,14 – Pensionary benefits – Teachers in private schools – Such schools taken over – Salary paid by Govt. – Teachers retiring by putting less than 10 years’ service – High Court, on writ, allowing pension even without notice, on basis of decision of co-ordinate Bench – Said decision however, reversed by Supreme Court. Held that in view of the said decision, judgment of High Court is set-aside.(Para 1)
Cases Reffered:
1. State of Punjab and Others v. Dev Dutt Kaushal and Others (JT 1995 (6) SC 225)
JUDGEMENT:
ORDER
1. Respondents herein were teachers in private schools. Subse-quently, those private Higher Secondary Schools were taken over by the Punjab Government. Thereafter, it became the liability of the State Government to pay salary to the teachers employed in such institutions. Subsequently, the Respondents retired from service. Since they had put in less than 10 years of service the Appellants declined to give pensionary benefits to them. Under such circumstances, they filed a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution before the Punjab and Haryana High Court. The High Court without giving any opportunity to the Appellants to file any written statement allowed the Writ Petition in the light of a decision rendered by a co-ordinate bench of that Court in the case of Dev Dutt Kaushal v. State of Punjab (JT 1995 (6) SC 225) and directed the Appellants to pay pension to the Respondents. It is in this way the Appellants are in appeal before us.
2. Learned Counsel brought to our notice that the decision relied upon by the High Court has been set aside by this Court in the case of State of Punjab and Others v. Dev Dutt Kaushal and Others (JT 1995 (6) SC 225 = 1995 Supp (4) SCC 748). We have perused the judgment and find that the decision relied upon by the High Court in allowing the Writ Petition of the Respondents has been reversed by this Court. Under such circumstances, the appeals deserve to be allowed. The judgment under appeal, therefore, is set aside. The appeals are allowed. No costs.
3. Before we part with the case, we make a mention that if the State of
Punjab frames any scheme with respect to the retired teachers of the schools, this judgment would not come in their way.
1. Respondents herein were teachers in private schools. Subse-quently, those private Higher Secondary Schools were taken over by the Punjab Government. Thereafter, it became the liability of the State Government to pay salary to the teachers employed in such institutions. Subsequently, the Respondents retired from service. Since they had put in less than 10 years of service the Appellants declined to give pensionary benefits to them. Under such circumstances, they filed a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution before the Punjab and Haryana High Court. The High Court without giving any opportunity to the Appellants to file any written statement allowed the Writ Petition in the light of a decision rendered by a co-ordinate bench of that Court in the case of Dev Dutt Kaushal v. State of Punjab (JT 1995 (6) SC 225) and directed the Appellants to pay pension to the Respondents. It is in this way the Appellants are in appeal before us.
2. Learned Counsel brought to our notice that the decision relied upon by the High Court has been set aside by this Court in the case of State of Punjab and Others v. Dev Dutt Kaushal and Others (JT 1995 (6) SC 225 = 1995 Supp (4) SCC 748). We have perused the judgment and find that the decision relied upon by the High Court in allowing the Writ Petition of the Respondents has been reversed by this Court. Under such circumstances, the appeals deserve to be allowed. The judgment under appeal, therefore, is set aside. The appeals are allowed. No costs.
3. Before we part with the case, we make a mention that if the State of
Punjab frames any scheme with respect to the retired teachers of the schools, this judgment would not come in their way.
