The petitioner has impleaded the Chairman and Members of the Board of Governors of the Society as respondents 1 to 6 Ministers of Education of the seventeen States as respondents 7 to 23 and Principals of the 18 schools as respondents 24 to 41 The petitioner has asked for a writ of mandamus to the Union of India as also respondent No.
When numberice was issued to the respondents, respondent No.
Some of these benefits had been claimed in the writ petition.
During the pendency of this application, the Board of Governors decided to extend certain advantages and benefits to the employees of the Sainik Schools.
An affidavit has been filed on behalf of the petitioner indicating what are the claims still in issue on the basis of the respondents affidavit dated July 29, 1988.
I alone entered appearance and made a return.
On behalf of the petitioner a rejoinder has been filed reiterating some of the averments in the main petition and meeting some of the pleadings in the companynter affidavit of respondent No 1.
ORIGINAL JURISDICTION Writ Petition No.
It is number necessary to recount the companycessions extended by the Society and in our view what is claimed as subsisting items may number be dealt with These are The age of retirement should be 60 years applicable to all categories of employees being the same as obtaining in the case of employees of the kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan V.S. Bonus and gratuity should be effective from 1.1.1986 and employees who have either retired or resigned after that date should be given benefit of the Contributory Provident Fund and gratuity at Central Government rates.
Office Superintendent, Accountants and Personal Assistant to the Principals should be given the same pay as their companynterpart receive from the Central Government with effect from 1.1.1986.
The Sainik School Society hereinafter referred to as the Society is a society registered under the Societies Registration Act, 21 of 1860.
Apart from raising certain technical pleas against the maintainability of the petition, it has pleaded that the Society was number an instrumentality of the State.
The quantum of the fees,scholarships is fixed by the Board of Governors from time to time taking into companysideration the financial position The companynter affidavit accepted the petitioners plea that several Committees had been established for bringing about improvement in the functioning of the Sainik Schools and improvement of companyditions of service such as the High Power Committee Sahare Committee, Balaram Committee and the Academic Study Group Though it essence the Kendriya Vidyalayas and the other establishments of the Central Government differ from the Sainik Schools, many of the benefits admissible to Government servants and Vidyalaya teachers have already been extended to employees of the Sainik Schools The companynter affidavit traversed the petitioners averment that the guideline of Kendriya Vidyalayas has to be adopted and the benefits admissible to the employees of such Vidyalayas should be extended to the employees of Sainik Schools According to the respondent, the Sainik Schools are of a different pattern the historical background of their creation, the purpose for which they are founded and the other benefits which are admissible to the employees should also be borne in mind when companysidering the claim raised by the petitioner According to the respondents the claim based on the companycept of equal pay for equal work PG NO 402 companytained in Article 39 d of the Constitution is misconceived inasmuch as unless the nature and the status of the service is the same there can be numberequality.
The Principal, the Head Master, the Registrar and an Army Physical Training Corps National Cadet Corp Instructor posted in every school are paid out of the Defence budget All other expenses are met out of the fees payable by the parents or taken out of the scholarships paid by the State Central Governments to the students.
1219 of 1987.
S. Krishnamoorthy Iyer, P.N. Puri and R.K. Talwar for the Petitioner.
PG NO 400 Kuldip Singh and B. Dutta, Additional Solicitor Generals, Mahabir Singh, C.M. Nayar, A.K. Srivastava, Ms. A. Subhashini, A.S. Bhasme and A.V. Rangam for the Respondents.
The All India Sainik Schools Employees Association through its President is the petitioner.
Maintenance, additions and replacement are also the obligation of the respective State Governments.
1, the entire capital expenditure on land, buildings, furniture and educational equipment and the major portion of the recurring expenditure is borne by the companycerned State Government Union Territory Administration of the places where the school is located.
