Order
1. The question for consideration is whether the Teaching Assistants working in the Punjab Engineering College, Chandigarh are entitled to the pay scale of Lecturers on the basis of the principle “equal pay for equal work”. The Central Administrative Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench (the Tribunal) allowed the application of the respondents and granted them the pay scale of Lecturers. These appeals by way of special leave are against the judgment of the Tribunal.
2. Recruitment to various teaching posts for Punjab Engineering College, Chandigarh is governed by the Statutory Rules called the Punjab Engineering College, Chandigarh Administration (Class 1 Posts) Recruitment Rules, 1970 (the Rules). The Rules govern recruitment to the cadres of Lecturers, Assistant Professors, Associate Professor, Professor (Jr. Scale), Professor (Sr. Scale), Professor Postgraduate Course and Principal. Different pay scales have been provided for different teaching posts under the Rules. The respondents joined service as ad hoc Teaching Assistants on different dates during the period from 1983 to 1986. Teaching Assistants are not governed by the Rules. Ad hoc posts of Teaching Assistants were created from time to time to teach the engineering graduates. According to the appellant qualified candidates (with postgraduate qualifications) for the posts of Lecturers were not available and as such the Chandigarh Administration created the posts of Teaching Assistants. The pay scale for the post of Teaching Assistant was Rs 900 (consolidated) which has now been revised to Rs 1600. During the pendency of the matter before the Tribunal dearness allowance was also allowed to the Teaching Assistants. Initially the Lecturers grade was Rs 400-1100 but later on when the academic qualification for the post of Lecturer was revised from graduation to post-graduation the pay scale was also revised to Rs 700-1600.
3. The grievance of the respondents before the Tribunal was that they were performing same duties and functions as were being performed by the Lecturers but they were not given the same salary. It was their case that they were teaching the students same subjects which were being taught by the Lecturer. On that basis they claimed the pay scale of Lecturers post on the principle of “equal pay for equal work”. Although in the counter filed before the Tribunal and before this Court, the appellant has denied the claim of the respondents but having gone through the duties performed by the respondents it is not possible to deny that so far as the teaching work was concerned there was not much of a difference in the duties and the functions of the Lecturers and of the respondents-Teaching Assistants.
4. We proceed on the assumption that a Teaching Assistant teaches the same subjects to the same students as were being taught by the Lecturers/Assistant Professors/Professors. It is common knowledge that in various departments of a university different subjects are taught to the same set of students by different teachers who may be Lecturers, Assistant Professors or Professors. A teacher who is a Lecturer, cannot claim that he be given the same salary as given to a Professor who teaches a different subject or the same subject to the students. The quality and standard of teaching by a Professor is bound to be of much higher standard than that of a Lecturer. Keeping in view the qualitative difference of standard of teaching between the two teachers with different designations it cannot be claimed that they are entitled to the same pay scales. A Teaching Assistant is entirely a different class of teacher than that of the Lecturer. In the teaching profession classification is permissible on the basis of academic qualifications, experience and the quality/standard of teaching of various classes of teachers. We are, therefore, of the view that the Tribunal was not justified in granting the pay scale of Lecturers to the Teaching Assistants on the reasoning that they were teaching same subjects to same/similar students as was being done by the Lecturers. We allow the appeal, set aside the judgment of the Tribunal and dismiss the application of the respondents filed before the Tribunal. No costs.
5. Mr R.S Sodhi, learned counsel appearing for the respondents states that all the respondents who have been continuously working as Teaching Assistants and are now eligible to apply for the post of Lecturer may be granted one-time relaxation so far as the age bar is concerned. The request is reasonable. We direct the Chandigarh Administration to give one-time age relaxation to the Teaching Assistants who are continuously working as such and who are otherwise eligible to apply for the post of Lecturer under the Rules.