' This judgment shall dispose of Writ Petitions Nos.
14744/94,5866/94,867/94,5869/945870/94,5871/94, 872/94,5873/94,5874/94,5868/94,6814/94,6815/94,6816/94,6817/94,6818/94, 6819/94,6820/94,5013/94,13392/94 as the same questions of fact and law are involved in these writ petitions.
2. The case of the petitioner in W.P. No, 14744/94 is that he was appointed as a Teacher in 1971. He appeared in C.T. Examination held in December, 1975 but the result was not declared for a period of three years. He was declared successful in the result which was announced in 1978. His grievance is that on account of inordinate delay in the declaration of the result, he was deprived of the teaching allowance/increments/seniority. It is urged that it was held by this Court in Writ Petition No, 5690/80, that result of December, 1975 Examination (C.T./P.T.C.) would be deemed to have been declared in the month of March, 1976 for the purpose of teaching allowance/increments/seniority of the petitioner and other concerned. Deputy Education Officer awarded the selection grade to the petitioner in the light of the order passed in the aforesaid writ petition but respondent No, 3 (Accountant-General, Punjab) refused to refix the scale awarded to him on the ground that relief was available only to the petitioners of Writ Petition No,5690/80. The petitioner has filed the present writ petition for a declaration that he is also entitled to the same relief which has been granted to the petitioners of Writ Petition No, 5690/80.
3. Deputy Education Officer, Lahore Cantt. Appeared in Court on 21-12-1994 and confirmed that the Accountant-General, Punjab has raised objection to the refixation of the scale awarded to the petitioner on the ground that he was not party to the said writ petition. Accordingly, respondent No, 3 was directed to depute some responsible officer to appear in this Court and explain as to why the relief to the petitioner has been refused. Mr. Karam Din, . Accounts Officer of the Accountant- General, Punjab's office appeared. He stated that objection to the re-fixation of scale has been made because petitioner was not a party to the previous writ petition and the relief was granted by this Court only to the petitioners of that writ petition. The attention of the Officer was drawn to the following portions of the order passed by this Court in that writ petition:- "2. Report was called for from the respondents. It is conceded in the report that in case the result of 1975 Examination of PTC/CT was declared within the normal period the petitioners would have been entitled to all the benefits arising thereon.
3. In the instant case, the result could not be announced due to a departmental enquiry ordered by the Minister of Education with regard to certain alleged irregularities committed by the officers connected with the conduct of examinations but the petitioners cannot be blamed for late declaration of results. The respondents have stated in response to paragraph 7(d) of their report that the situation can be met if the result of December, 1975 Examination (of CT/PTC) could be deemed to have been declared in the month of March, 1976 for the purpose of Teaching Allowance/Increments/Seniority to the petitioners and other concerned.
4 I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record.
The report tendered by respondents reveals that the petitioners have passed the requisite examination and the result was announced at much later date but that would not affect the entitlement of the petitioners and, therefore, the petitioners would be entitled to all the benefits which are available to the candidates who have passed the said examination.
5. In view of the above, the writ petition is accepted with no order as to costs."
4. It was particularly pointed out that the Government had made concession not only for the petitioners of that writ petition but also for all "other concerned". Confronted with this, the Accounts Officer submitted that his office has committed mistake in understanding the implications and scope of the order passed by this Court. He offered to make a concessional statement that the case of the petitioner being equal to the petitioners in Writ Petition No, 5690/80, he will also be treated alike and his scale of pay shall also be refixed in the light of the order of this Court. However, I asked him to go and obtain instructions from his higher officers so that the concession made should - come from the authoritative quarters. The case was adjourned for about an hour. The Accounts Officer came back and informed that he had brought the case to the notice of the Director-General of Accounts and the Additional Accountant-General (Pay Fixation) and they have authorised him to make the statement that the order passed by this Court in Writ Petition No, 5690/80 will be treated by them to be applicable to all other concerned teachers who successfully passed the December, 1975 Examination of CT/PTC. In these circumstances, I am satisfied that the concession has been made from he relevant responsible quarters.
6. All these cases were at the motion stage. In view of the concession made by the Accountant- General, which of course was the only right thing to do, in the circumstances of the case, I called upon the learned Advocate-General to enter appearance. Learned Advocate-General also could not controvert the legal position that the order passed on 18-2-1991 in Writ Petition No, 5690/80 was declaration of law regarding all the successful candidates of December, 1975 Examination of CT/PTC, for the purposes of Teaching Allowance/increments/seniority. Therefore, the learned Advocate-General supported the proposition that the petitioner and all other teachers, similarly placed, are entitled to the same benefits which were granted to the petitioners in Writ Petition No, 5690/80. In view of the laudable stand taken by the learned Advocate-General and the concession made by the Accountant-General, Punjab, it is of no use to keep these writ petitions pending or to formally admit them for regular hearing. These will be deemed to have been admitted and decided.
7. For what has been discussed above, the writ petitions are accepted and it is declared that the petitioners would be entitled to all the benefits which are available to the candidates who passed the said examination. Accordingly, it is directed that the re-fixation of pay etc. Of the petitioners will be made in the light of the order passed by this Court in Writ Petition No, 5690/80.
8. It was painful to observe, that despite the fact that this Court had decided as far back as 18-2- 1991 that the examinees of PTC/C.T. Of December, 1975 examination would be deemed to have passed the said examination in the month of March, 1976, and they would be entitled to all the benefits flowing from success in their examination, the relief was not granted to all the successful candidates. The petitioners were refused relief by the Accountant-General Office without application of mind. It was clearly mentioned in the order dated 18-2-1991 that the Government had conceded the relief not only for the petitioners of that writ petition but for all "other concerned".
However, it is gratifying to note that the higher functionaries of the Accountant-General Office have realised the mistake and readily conceded to the legal position obtainable in the case. For that, they have to be appreciated.
9. What is agitating my mind is that what will happen to those teachers who have passed the aforesaid examination, but may not have so far applied for the grant of the benefits under the order of this Court. I am told that some 500 candidates appeared in the said (C.T./PTC)
Examinations and many of them must have passed the examinations. But only a few of them have filed the writ petitions. Most likely, many of them may not even to be aware that a benefit has accrued to them. It is the duty of the officers of the Education Department that they should see to it that every person entitled gets the relief without approaching the Court. It cannot be countenanced that some of the persons who approach this Court may get the relief while others, though equally entitled, may be deprived of the relief simply because they have not approached the Court. It will be clear discrimination if some of the persons, though similarly placed, are not in a position to get the benefit while others do.
Constitutional dictates enshrined in Article 25 of the Constitution require that all persons similarly placed have to be dealt with equally, without any discrimination. It is further emphasised that to provide justice is not the duty of Courts alone. Every functionary of the State, who has to deal with the rights and obligations of the people must do justice himself, without driving them to the Courts of law for obtaining relief. If any functionary of the State does that, except under bona fide mistake, he becomes guilty of committing misconduct, and for that he becomes liable to be proceeded against under the Efficiency and Discipline Rules, and in appropriate cases such a person may even incur criminal liability. Accordingly, it is directed that Director, Education (Schools), Lahore Division, shall see to it that every teacher who passed the C.T./PTC Examination, held in December, 1975, gets the benefit in respect of Teaching Allowance/Increments/Seniority in terms of the order dated 18-2-1991, (supra). He shall direct all the Deputy Education Officers to comply with this order.
10. All these writ petitions succeed but there will be no order as to costs.