Court Rules Absence of Statutory Provisions for Pension Benefits to Aided School Employees Does Not Violate Constitutional Rights
In a significant ruling, the Chhattisgarh High Court has dismissed petitions filed by retired teachers from aided schools seeking pensionary benefits equivalent to those enjoyed by government school employees. The judgment, delivered by Justice Bibhu Datta Guru, underscored the absence of specific statutory rules that mandate pension benefits for employees of aided schools, thereby ruling out any violation of Article 14 of the Constitution regarding equal treatment.
The petitioners, including Ashok Kumar Hazra and others, argued that their service conditions are governed by the Madhya Pradesh Sikshan Sanstha Adhyapakon Tatha Anya Karmachariyon Ke Vetano Ka Sandaya Adhiniyam, 1978. They contended that despite circulars and rules indicating parity in salary with government school employees, the refusal to extend pension benefits constituted arbitrary discrimination under Article 14.
The court, however, found that the statutory scheme did not mandate pension benefits for aided school employees. The judgment highlighted that the aid provided to these schools was intended solely for management and functioning, not extending to post-retirement benefits such as pensions. Justice Guru emphasized that the court could not direct the legislature to enact specific laws, citing the constitutional provision that Parliament exercises sovereign power to legislate.
The decision drew on precedents, including the Supreme Court's ruling in the Vikram Bhalchandra Ghongade case, which distinguished the conditions applicable to government and aided school teachers based on rules framed under Article 309 of the Constitution. The absence of such rules in the current context further negated the petitioners' claims.
The judgment also addressed procedural issues, noting the petitions were filed years after retirement and lacked the inclusion of necessary parties, further weakening their case.
This ruling is set to impact similar claims from retired aided school employees seeking pension parity, reinforcing the need for legislative action to address discrepancies between aided and government school employee benefits.
Bottom Line:
Pensionary benefits - Retired teachers/employees of aided schools cannot claim pensionary benefits at par with government school teachers/employees in absence of specific rules framed under relevant statutory provisions.
Statutory provision(s): Article 14 of the Constitution of India, Madhya Pradesh Sikshan Sanstha (Adhyapakon Tatha Anya Karmachariyon Ke Vetano Ka Sandaya) Adhiniyam, 1978, Rules for Grant In Aid To Non-Government Educational Institutions, 1979, Article 309 of the Constitution of India.
Ashok Kumar Hazra v. State of Chhattisgarh, (Chhattisgarh) : Law Finder Doc Id # 2823450
