Manupatra

Fill in the following details to e-mail

Subject

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd"> <html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"> <head> </head> <body> <div style="font-family:Verdana, Geneva, sans-serif; font-size:12px; text-align:justify"> <table width="800" border="0" style="border:1px solid #ccc;padding:5px;" align="center" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0"> <tr> <td align="left" valign="top"> Supreme Court Concession given by State Counsel before Tribunal contrary to statutory rules is not binding as there cannot be any estoppel against law MANU/SC/1329/2019 - (26 Sep 2019) </td> </tr> <tr> <td align="left" valign="top">Director of Elementary Education, Odisha & Ors. Vs. Pramod Kumar Sahoo</td> </tr> <tr> <td align="left" valign="top" style="background-color:#FDEDCE">The challenge in the present appeal is to an order passed by the High Court whereby, the writ petition filed by the Appellant challenging the order passed by the Odisha Administrative Tribunal remained unsuccessful. The Tribunal has directed the Appellant to grant pay scale of Trained Intermediate Arts Teacher i.e. Rs.1080- Rs.1800. 
The Respondent claimed that he is entitled to pay scale of Rs.840 - Rs.1240 from the very day of his appointment and pay scale of Rs. 1080-1800 after Orissa Revised Scales of Pay Rules, 1989 as amended in the year 1990. Since the said pay scale was not granted to him, he invoked the jurisdiction of the Tribunal when he filed Original Application. The basis of argument is that, he is intermediate and, thus, he is to be treated as a Trained Teacher which will entitle him to the pay scale of Rs.1080 - Rs.1800. Before the learned Tribunal, the counsel for the appellant conceded that the Teachers having intermediate qualification are entitled to the scale of pay as is available to Trained Matric Teachers. On the basis of such concession, the learned Tribunal allowed the Original Application. 
The Appellant submitted that the separate pay scales are provided for Untrained Matric Teachers and for Trained Matric Teachers. Merely because the Respondent is intermediate, that is higher qualification than the Matric, does not make him a Trained Teacher. Therefore, the concession given by the State counsel is erroneous concession in law and, does not bind the appellant. 
The concession given by the learned State Counsel before the Tribunal was a concession in law and contrary to the statutory rules. Such concession is not binding on the State for the reason that there cannot be any estoppel against law. The rules provide for a specific Grade of Pay, therefore, the concession given by the learned State Counsel before the Tribunal is not binding on the Appellant. 
The Trained Matric Teacher is the one who has been trained for the purposes of teaching. In the absence training, the Respondent cannot be said to be a Trained Matric Teacher entitled to the pay scale meant for such teachers. The classification based upon educational qualification for grant of higher pay scale to a trained person or a person possessing higher qualification is a valid classification. Therefore, the order passed by the Tribunal as affirmed by the High Court is not sustainable in law. Consequently, the appeal is allowed.</td> </tr> <tr> <td align="left" valign="top" ></td> </tr> <tr> <td align="left" valign="top" >Tags : Pay-scale, Grant, Direction</td> </tr> <tr> <td align="left" valign="top">&nbsp;</td> </tr> <tr>  <td align="left" valign="top">Source : newsroom.manupatra.com</td> </tr> <tr> <td align="left" valign="top">&nbsp;</td> </tr> <tr> <td align="left" valign="top">Regards</td> </tr> <tr> <td align="left" valign="top">Team Manupatra</td> </tr> <tr> <td align="left" valign="top">&nbsp;</td> </tr> </table> </div> </body> </html>