1. An issue as to whether higher scale of pay can be granted to an Assistant Teacher on account of enhancement of his educational qualification
through correspondence course without taking prior permission from the concerned District Inspector of Schools (SE) is raised in the present writ
petition. An identical issue was raised earlier before the Learned Single Judge of this Court in the matter of Sri Sanjoy Kr. Ghosh v. State (In re:
W.P. 2707 (W) of 2003) wherein it was held that higher scale of pay can be granted to the Assistant Teacher of School who has acquired higher
educational qualification in the relevant subject, notwithstanding prior permission was not granted in his favour either for enrolling him as a student
in higher studies or for enabling him to appear in examination conducted through correspondence course by the UGC-affiliated universities.
2. The view which was so taken by the Learned Single Judge of this Court in the said case could not be agreed upon by the other Learned Single
Bench of this Court while dealing with the present writ petition for various reasons mentioned in His Lordship''s order dated 24th November,
2011.
3. By referring to the Government Order No. 548-SE(S) dated 24th June, 1997 and the other Government Order No. 549-SE(S) dated 24th
June, 1997, His Lordship observed that when the aforesaid Government Orders imposed a condition for obtaining prior permission from the
concerned D.I. of Schools (S.E.) for enrolment of the petitioner in M.A. course and for enabling him to appear in the M.A. Part-I & Final
examination and further since admittedly he acquired the higher qualification without obtaining prior permission from the concerned District
Inspector of Schools (SE), he cannot be granted higher scale of pay so long as the said Government Order is in existence, as this Court sitting in
the writ jurisdiction, cannot consider the claim of the petitioner by disregarding the said Government Orders. However, instead of taking the
ultimate conclusion in this regard, His Lordship, for maintaining judicial decorum, sought for a reference to a Larger Bench for resolving the said
issue. Accordingly, this writ petition is placed before us for consideration.
4. Let us now consider the present issue in the facts of the instant case.
5. Here is the case where admittedly the petitioner was appointed as an Assistant Teacher in Social Science Group in the year 1994 prior to the
coming into operation of the School Service Commission Act. At the time of his appointment, he had Honours Degree at the graduation level in
History. Subsequently, in December 1998, he sought for permission from the school authority for allowing him to complete his Master Degree
course in the relevant subject. Such permission was granted by the school authority. The petitioner completed his Master Degree course with such
permission granted by the school authority. He appeared in the M.A. Part-I and final examination after obtaining study leave from the West Bengal
Board of Secondary Education and ultimately, he acquired Master Degree in December 2000. The last date of the said examination in which he
appeared, was 14th December, 2000.
6. Admittedly, the concerned District Inspector of Schools (SE) was not approached either by the petitioner or by the Managing Committee of the
said school for grant of prior permission either for allowing the petitioner to enroll in the Master Degree course or for allowing him to appear in the
examinations.
7. Problem started when after acquiring such Master Degree in the relevant subject, the school authority, on being approached by the petitioner,
recommended for grant of higher scale of pay to him for his enhanced educational qualification, before the concerned District Inspector of Schools
(SE). The concerned District Inspector of Schools (SE) refused to grant higher scale of pay to the petitioner for his enhanced educational
qualification as he did not enhance his educational qualification after obtaining prior permission from the concerned District Inspector of Schools
(SE) in terms of the Government Order No. 548-SE(S) dated 24th June, 1997.
8. The said decision of the concerned District Inspector of Schools (SE) is under challenge in this writ petition at the instance of the said aggrieved
Assistant Teacher.
9. Let us now consider as to how far the concerned District Inspector of Schools (SE) was justified in rejecting the petitioner''s claim in the facts of
the instant case.
10. An identical dispute was raised before another Division Bench of this Hon''ble Court in MAT 633 of 2012 (Samir Kumar Saha v. State of
West Bengal & Ors.) wherein Their Lordships held that the Government Order dated 24th June, 1997 which was issued on the subject of
recognition of correspondence courses conducted by the different universities of India did not deal with the subject relating to grant of any benefit
for improving academic qualification through correspondence course. According to Their Lordships, the teachers'' claim for higher scale of pay for
his enhanced educational qualification cannot be decided on the basis of the said government order.
11. Considering the fact that the teacher concerned completed the higher studies through correspondence course without affecting his duties in the
school and he having improved his qualification in the relevant subject helped the students of the school with his enriched knowledge on the
subject, the said Division Bench held that higher scale of pay for his enhanced educational qualification cannot be denied to him.
12. Accordingly, the Director of School Education. West Bengal was directed to take immediate appropriate steps for granting the benefit of
higher scale of pay to the said Assistant Teacher for acquiring the post graduate degree in relevant subject through correspondence course and
disburse necessary amount to the said Assistant Teacher without further delay.
13. Mr. De, Learned Advocate appearing for the State-respondents submits that though the issue which was involved in the said case before the
said Division Bench of this Hon''ble Court, was identical with the issue presently before us but the said issue, in fact was not decided by the said
Division Bench either by holding that prior permission of the District Inspector of Schools (SE) is necessary for grant of higher scale of pay for the
enhanced educational qualification of such Assistant Teacher or by holding that such prior permission of the D.I. of Schools (SE) is not necessary
for grant of higher scale of pay to the Assistant Teacher for his enhanced educational qualification in the relevant subject.
14. We find some substance in such contention of Mr. De as we find from the said judgment that though the said issue was involved therein but the
said issue was not resolved in clear term by holding that notwithstanding prior permission was not granted by the concerned District Inspector of
Schools (SE), higher scale of pay can be granted to the Assistant Teacher who enhanced his educational qualification through correspondence
course in the relevant subject without affecting the academic interest of the students in this school, but if the entire judgment is considered in its true
spirit, then we have no hesitation to hold that the said issue was decided against the State respondents. However, for defusing any confusion in this
regard, we feel it necessary to resolve the said dispute with reference to the said Government Order as well as the subsequent Rule and/or Circular
issued on the relevant subject in the context of the submission of Mr. De who contended that when law requires a particular thing to be done in a
certain manner, it must be done in that manner or not at all as was held by the Hon''ble Supreme Court in the case of Narbada Prasad Vs.
Chhaganlal and Others, .
15. It is no doubt true that the Government Order of 1997 deal with the subject regarding recognition of the degree acquired through
correspondence and/or distance course conducted by some of the recognized Universities in West Bengal and those government orders do not
deal with the subject of grant of financial benefit to Assistant teachers for acquiring enhanced degree in relevant subject through correspondence
course and/or distance course conducted by different Universities in India but at the same time, a question may arise that if degree which is
acquired either through correspondence course or through distance mode of education through any University is not recognised by the
Government, then can financial relief be claimed by such an Assistant teacher for his enhanced educational qualification which he acquired without
taking prior permission of the D.I. of Schools (SE)?
16. Grant of financial benefit to the teacher who has improved educational qualification in the relevant subject, is dealt with in Rule 12(3) of Ropa
1998. For proper appreciation of the problem raised in the present case. We feel it necessary to set out the said Rule hereunder:--
Rule 12(3):--All teachers including Physical Education Teachers and Librarians of Secondary Schools who have improved/will improve their
qualifications who were appointed with higher qualification in the subjects or groups relevant to their teaching/appointment shall get higher scale of
pay appropriate to their qualifications, with effect from the 1st January, 1996 or the date of improving qualifications, whichever is latter, provided
that such higher qualified teachers in the relevant subjects or group is justified as per approved staff pattern of other school, if said teacher is
appointed through West Bengal School Service Commission, his/her pay will be fixed in the scale of pay as per his/her qualification mentioned by
the West Bengal School Service Commission.
17. Let us now consider the present problem in the light of the above quoted Rule of Ropa 1998.
18. We have already indicated above that the petitioner was appointed as an Assistant Teacher in the said school prior to coming into operation of
the School Service Commission Act, 1997. As such, the last part of the proviso contained in Rule 12(3) wherein the subject relating to the
teachers appointed through the School Service Commission is dealt with, has no application in the present case. So we will have to opt the said
portion of the said Rule out of our reconsideration presently.
19. Ropa 1998 was notified on 12th February. 1999 and the effect of the said Ropa was given retrospectively from 1st January, 1996 as per
recommendation given by the Pay Commission. Thus, when the new revised scale of pay of the teachers and non-teaching staff was introduced by
framing revision of Pay and Allowances Rule 1998, the Government was aware about its earlier Government Order issued on 24th June, 1997.
When despite having knowledge of the earlier Government Order dated 24th June, 1997. the Government, while framing revision of Pay and
Allowances Rule 1998 did not specifically mention in the said Rule that such financial benefit cannot be given to those Assistant Teachers who
acquired higher qualification in the relevant subject without obtaining prior permission from the concerned District Inspector of Schools (SE), grant
of higher scale of pay to such Assistant Teachers after they have acquired higher qualification in the relevant subject, in our view cannot be denied
provided however, they satisfy the condition mentioned therein. In fact, the condition for grant of higher scale of pay to such Assistant teacher is
qualified in the said Rule which provides that such higher scale of pay can be granted to those teachers only when such higher qualified teacher in
the relevant subject or group is justified as per approved staff pattern of that school.
20. Thus, in our considered view, if the said condition as provided in the said proviso of Rule 12(3) of the Ropa 1998 is satisfied then the
petitioner''s prayer for grant of higher scale of pay for his enhanced educational qualification cannot be denied notwithstanding he acquired such
degree without obtaining prior permission from the concerned District Inspector of Schools (SE) in terms of the Government Order dated 24th
June, 1997. Provided however degree which he acquired is recognised as per the Government Order No. 549-SE(S) dated 24th June, 1997.
21. Thus, we endorse the conclusion which was drawn by the other Division Bench of this Hon''ble Court in the case of Samir Kumar Saha v.
State of West Bengal & Ors. (supra) by holding that the petitioner herein is entitled to get higher scale of pay for his enhanced qualification subject
to satisfaction of the conditions as mentioned above.
22. The writ petition is thus, disposed of with a direction upon the concerned District Inspector of Schools (SE) to consider the petitioner''s claim
for grant of higher scale of pay for his enhanced educational qualification from the date of enhancement of his educational qualification in the
relevant subject, afresh in the light of the observations made hereinabove after hearing the petitioner and the school authority viz. the erstwhile
employer of the petitioner, and decide the petitioner''s claim by passing a reasoned order in support of his conclusion positively within a period of
eight weeks from the date of communication of this order.
23. The writ petition is, thus disposed of. Urgent Photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the learned Advocate for the
petitioner immediately.
