IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR. O R D E R S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION No.5575/2009. : : Managing Committee Vs. Smt. Sneh Lata & Ors. : : Date of Order 10.7.2009 HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMAD RAFIQ Mr. Amardeep Atwal for the petitioner. Mr. Shiv Charan Gupta for the respondent No.1.
Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. This writ petition has been filed with the prayer that complete record of execution proceedings pending before the Civil Judge (Junior Division), Sikar may be called for and after perusal of the same, writ petition be allowed and execution proceedings initiated against the petitioner be quashed.
3. Contention of learned counsel for the petitioner is that petitioner-institution is receiving grant-in-aid to the extent of 60% and, therefore, despite order passed by Tribunal as upheld by this Court dismissing their writ petition, petitioner can be required to pay only 40% of the decreetal amount, which is their share and remaining 60% should be paid by the Director Secondary Education. Learned counsel, therefore, argued that execution proceedings initiated against the petitioner are wholly without jurisdiction and such execution proceedings are liable to be quashed and set aside.
4. Learned counsel for the respondent No.1 opposed the writ petition and submitted that question as regards the entitlement of employees to receive benefit of selection scale of aided and recognized educational institution has been set at rest by Larger Bench of this Court in S. R. Higher Secondary School & Ors. Vs. Raj. Non-Government Educational Institutions Tribunal, Jaipur & Ors. : 2002 (3) WLC, 586 and taking note of this fact, the argument, which was raised in the present writ petition was already raised before this Court by petitioner in its earlier filed SBCWP No.377/2005, which was rejected vide judgment dated 20.1.2005. Learned counsel, therefore, submitted that writ petition is wholly misconceived and the same be dismissed with costs.
5. Upon hearing learned counsel for the parties and perusing the material on record, I find that appeal filed by respondent herein was allowed by Rajasthan Non-Government Educational Institution Tribunal, Jaipur vide judgment dated 23.11.2002 with other three appeals. In the judgment, petitioners were directed to pay to respondents benefits of selection scale in terms of Government circular dated 25.1.1992. Contention that petitioner can be held responsible for making payment of only 40% of the decreetal amount and the remaining 60% to which extent it is receiving aid should be recovered from the Government, was raised before this Court in the earlier writ petition filed by petitioner. The writ petition was dismissed taking note of this argument in the following terms :-
After hearing learned counsel for the petitioner and perusing the material on record, in the facts and circumstances, I find no error or illegality in the impugned order passed by the Tribunal so as to call for any further interference of this court. However, it is for the petitioner to claim reimbursement of the amount of selection scale to be paid to the respondent employee from the grant-in-aid to be paid by the State Government as per Full Bench judgment of this court in the case of S. R. Higher Secondary School & Ors. Vs. Raj. Non-Government Educational Institutions Tribunal, Jaipur & Ors., 2002 (3) WLC, 586. The payment made to the respondent employee as per directions of the Tribunal, is always subject to liberty, as referred above.
The writ petition stands disposed of accordingly.
What the petitioner is in fact seeking to agitate is the same argument, which it raised in the earlier judgment, which was considered and rejected by this Court. This argument cannot be again agitated as the basis for quashing the execution proceedings. Such a contention cannot be countenanced because the respondent would certainly be entitled to the benefits, which are following from the judgment passed by Tribunal and which has been upheld by Single Bench. On being pointedly asked, learned counsel submitted that judgment of High Court has attained finality and no appeal there against was filed before Division Bench. The Single Bench in the aforesaid judgment directed that it is for the petitioner to claim reimbursement of the amount for selection scale paid to the respondent-employee from the Government by way of grant-in-aid.
I, therefore, do not find any merit in the writ petition, which is accordingly dismissed.
(MOHAMMAD RAFIQ)J.
A.Arora/-
Item No.45