ASKWB

She takes not only Geography Classes but also History Classes in her School. Permission from D.I. was necessary to avail the leave at the time of Exam. and for demanding higher Scale afterwards.

@KG21012
Pls go through the following cases where the teachers acquired P.G. degree in a subject which is different from Hons. subject.
CASE – 1
Calcutta High Court
Kush Chandra Barman vs The State Of West Bengal & Ors on 4 May, 2012
Author: Jyotirmay Bhattacharya
W. P. No. 1369 of 2005
Heard on: 14-01-2012.
Judgment On: May 4, 2012.
The petitioner is an Assistant Teacher of Boro Balaram Lal Behari Vidyamandir, Burdwan. He was appointed as an Assistant Teacher in Social Science Group on 23rd March, 1993 as a Pass Graduate with Geography. Subsequently, he passed M.A. examination in History through correspondence course from the University of Burdwan in 1997. His prayer for higher scale of pay for his enhanced qualification was rejected by the District Inspector of Schools (S.E.), Burdwan, on 18th May, 2005. The said order of the District Inspector of Schools, which is appearing at page 35 of the writ petition, is under challenge in this application at the instance of the said Assistant Teacher.
The District Inspector of Schools held that higher scale of pay cannot be granted to the petitioner as he did not improve his qualification after taking prior permission from the school authority. The District Inspector of Schools also held that since the school authority did not allow the petitioner to take classes in History with the approval of the concerned District Inspector of Schools, he is not entitled to get higher scale of pay for his enhanced qualification in non-relevant subject. The District Inspector of Schools also held that staff pattern of the school does not justify grant of higher scale of pay to the petitioner for his enhanced qualification. He further elaborated this ground of rejection by pointing out that the total number of sectioned post in Social Science Group in the said school is four and presently four Assistant Teachers are working in Social Science Group in the said school. He recorded in the order that out of those four teachers two teachers namely, Sunita Roy, M.A. in History, B.Ed. and Sandip Deyase, M.A. in Geography, B.Ed. are enjoying Post Graduated scale of pay and the other two teachers namely, Shyma Prasad Das, B.A. with History and Kush Chandra Barman (Petitioner), B.A. with Geography are enjoying Pass Graduate scale of pay. He further mentioned that in addition to the aforesaid staff strength in Social Science Group one Srikanta Dey, a teacher of Work Education and Physical Education Group is also enjoying higher scale of pay for his P.G. Degree in History.
Under such circumstances, the petitioner’s prayer for higher scale of pay for his Post Graduate qualification was rejected by the said District Inspector of Schools.
Let me now consider as to how far the said District Inspector of Schools was justified in rejecting the petitioner’s prayer for higher scale of pay for his enhanced qualification, in the facts of the instant case.
Since the petitioner enhanced his qualification through correspondence course in 1997 by enrolling himself as a candidate in the said course in 1996, this Court is of the view that he was not required to take prior permission from the school authority for enhancing his educational qualification through correspondence course as per the Government Order dated 26th June, 1997 as the said Government order did not see the light of the day when the petitioner got himself enrolled in the said correspondence course.
The petitioner’s right to get higher scale of pay for his enhanced qualification, in my view, is governed by the provisions contained in Rule 12(3) of ROPA 1998. Rule 12(3) of ROPA 1998 is set out hereunder:
“12(3): All teachers, including Physical Education Teachers and Librarians of Secondary Schools who have improved/we improved their qualification or who were appointed with higher qualification in the subjects or group relevant to their teaching/appointment shall get higher scale of pay appropriate to their qualification, with effect from the 1st January, 1996 or the date of improving qualification, whichever is latter, provided that such higher qualified teachers in the relevant subject or group is justified as per approved staff pattern of that school. If such teacher is appointed through 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.” Since the petitioner was appointed as an Assistant Teacher in the said school in 1993 prior to the School Service Commission Act came into effect, the last part of the said provision of Rule 12(3) of ROPA 1998 is not attracted in the instant case. Undisputedly, the petitioner enhanced his educational qualification by acquiring Master Degree in History which is relevant to his teaching group. As such he is entitled to get higher scale of pay for his enhanced educational qualification provided such higher qualified teacher in the relevant subject or group is justified as per approved staff pattern of that school. The said District Inspector of Schools held that grant of higher scale of pay to the petitioner was not justified as per the staff pattern of the said school as out of four teachers in the said Group two teachers are already enjoying post graduate scale of pay in addition to the another teacher of Work Education & Physical Education Group viz. Srikanta Dey who is also enjoying higher scale of pay for his post Graduate Degree in history. If that be the correct position of fact then no interference with impugned order is needed in the facts of the instant case. But the petitioner herein, by affirming an affidavit, stated in the writ petition that out of those two Assistant Teachers one, namely, Sandip Deyase, M.A. in Geography, B.Ed. left this school after tendering his resignation, before passing the impugned order. Despite direction was given for filing affidavit in this matter, the State respondents have not filed any affidavit. Thus, the claim of the petitioner to the effect that Sri Sandip Deyase left the school after tendering resignation before the impugned order was passed by the District Inspector of Schools, remains uncontroverted by the State respondents. Since the said fact was not brought to the notice of the District Inspector of Schools, the said District Inspector of Schools could not consider the said fact while passing the impugned order.
Thus, if the said fact of leaving the school by Sandip Deyase after tendering resignation is true and correct then the petitioner’s claim for higher scale of pay for his enhanced qualification, in my view, is required to be reconsidered in the light of the ROPA, 1998.
Considering such uncontroverted claim of the petitioner, the impugned order passed by the said District Inspector of Schools is set aside and the petitioner’s prayer for grant of higher scale of pay is remitted back to the concerned District Inspector of Schools who is required to reconsider the petitioner’s such claim in the light of the provision contained in ROPA 1998 after ascertaining the correctness of the petitioner’s claim that Sandip Deyase left the service of the said school and engagement of any additional History teacher with Master Degree qualification in the school in the post vice Sandip Deyase, is justified according to the staff pattern of the said school or not. The District Inspector of Schools is, thus, directed to reconsider the petitioner’s prayer for higher scale of pay in the light of the observation made hereinabove and dispose of the same by passing a reasoned order after giving a reasonable opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and the school authority within twelve weeks from the date of communication of this order.
The concerned authority is also directed to intimate his decision to the petitioner and the school authority
immediately thereafter.
The writ petition is, thus, disposed of.
(Jyotirmay Bhattacharya, J.)
Source: http://www.indiankanoon.org/doc/103782747/

CASE – 2
“Kolkata High Court (Appellete Side)
Uttam Kumar Sarkar vs State Of West Bengal & Ors. , on 6 September, 2012
Author: Ashoke Kumar Dasadhikari
06.09.2012
ss W.P. 8875(W) of 2005 Uttam Kumar Sarkar Vs. State of West Bengal & ors.
Learned Counsel for the writ petitioner submits although the writ petitioner was allowed to improve his qualification in different subject i.e. M.A. in History and he was allowed to render service or impart education on that subject, his prayer for higher scale of pay was denied. He submits that the concerned authorities granted permission for improvement and he has improved his qualification. The school authorities are benefited and although the school authorities recommended such higher scale of pay but the writ petitioner was denied the benefit. He submits that the respondents be directed to release higher scale of pay against such improved qualification. Learned Counsel for the State submits that the permission was granted on some condition and according to him, the condition may be not in accordance with law. Heard the learned Counsel appearing for the parties and considered the materials available on record. It appears that the concerned District Inspector of Schools permitted the writ petitioner to improve his qualification on a different subject i.e. M.A. in History examination and the writ petitioner was allotted classes in that subject and he was allowed to change his subject. Therefore, I do not find any impediment on the side of the District Inspector of Schools to release higher scale of pay on and from the date when the writ petitioner has improved his qualification. Therefore, I direct the District Inspector of Schools (SE), North 24-Parganas to release higher scale of pay in favour of the writ petitioner from the date of improvement. The entire exercise is to be completed within a period of eight weeks from the date of communication of this order.
The writ petition is, thus, disposed of. There would be no order as to costs.
(Ashoke Kumar Dasadhikari, J.)”
Source: http://indiankanoon.org/doc/9119982/

Upgrade to Higher Scale of Assistant Teacher
If an Assistant Teacher(H/PG catagory) admitted in MA course(Distance Education) before joining as Assistant Teacher and complete the MA course in service , would his degree legal ? Could he claim for higher scale i.e PG scale ? Is there G.O for upgrade to higher scale ?

Can I demand PG Scale?
I passed BA honours in Bengali(CU)(2007), I joined in a Govt. aided School in pass scale in 2002 through SSC.I obtained M.A.(Bengali) through distance education from RBU in 2005. Can I demand PG scale ?