CWP No. 7130/2010 12.05.2011 Present: Mr. Vishwa Bhushan, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Ram Murti Bisht, Dy. A.G. for respondents-state Petitioner has prayed mainly for the following reliefs:- “(i) That the illegality withheld “Grant in Aid” due to the petitioner (for March, 2009 to till date) along with all the consequential benefits; (ii) That the respondents may be directed to calculate the quantum of “Grant in Aid” admissible to the petitioner and if any discrepancy is found the amount due to the petitioner may kindly be released.” 2. According to the petitioner, she was appointed prior to 6.11.2006. She joined as a PTA (Home Science) on 21.09.2006. The respondents are refuting the petitioner’s claim, inter alia, on the following grounds set out in the reply which reads as under:- “1. That the petitioner is not at all entitled to file the present writ petition before this Hon’ble Court as the petitioner has been engaged as Home Science teacher on PTA basis by the concerned PTA without seeking any clarification/sanction with regard to the filling up of the post of Home Science teacher from competent authority which is an isolated category of the Classical and Vernacular cadre. Hence the writ petition filed by the petitioner deserves to the dismissed. Copy of Grant in Aid Rules envisaging of prior approval of higher authority is annexed as Annexure R-1/A. 2. That in view of the letter No. EDN-H-Ele.(5)C(10) 17/2007-PTA dated 13.7.2007 of the replying respondent, no C& V category teachers which includes Home Science/ Craft/Music teachers shall be appointed by PTA for the time being, thus according to this the question to allow the petitioner in the school on the post for which the appointment to the petitioner was given by the PTA Committee does not arise. Therefore, the question to release the Grant-in- Aid to the petitioner does not arise at all. Copy of letter dated 13.7.2007 is annexed as Annexure R-1/B. 3. That if any pay under the policy of Grant in Aid to PTA was made to the petitioner, the same does not confer any right in favour of the petitioner to release the same in future also because the pay was released to the petitioner under Grant in Aid policy erroneously. A wrong decision by the Government does not give a right to enforce the wrong order and claim parity or equality or continuity because two wrong can never make a right, hence the present writ petition filed by the petitioner deserves to the dismissed.” 3. However, perusal of Annexure R-1/A, which are Rules “Grant-in-aid to Parent Teacher Association Rule 2006” (hereinafter referred to as the “Rules”) contain the following clause:- “Apart from above Vide this Directorate letter No. EDN-H(2) B(2) PTA/2006 dated 6-11.2006, you were also informed that the Government has decided that the posts of TGT & C&V category which become vacant due to retirement, promotion, transfer or any other reasons should temporarily be kept vacant and PTA arrangements against these posts should not be made till further orders. Such vacant posts will be first utilized for posting of such teachers being recruited on batch- wise basis as well as by promotion from JBT and C&V categories. And you were requested to ensure that no PTA teachers were appointed henceforth, till further orders. If the PTA has appointed any TGT & C&V category teacher after 6-11-2006 they shall be liable to be paid by concerned PTA only.” 4. To the same effect is also the letter dated 13.7.2007 (Annexure R-1/B). From the aforesaid reading, it is clear that all such persons who had been appointed as PTA prior to 6.11.2006 would be entitled to the benefits of the Rules and the payment of “Grant-in-Aid”. It is not the case of the respondents that petitioner’s appointment is otherwise not in accordance with Rules or prescribed procedure. 5. Consequently, the stand taken by the respondents being untenable in law and contrary to the Rules is unsustainable and the petition needs to be allowed. There shall be a direction to the respondents to consider the petitioner’s case in accordance with Rules and release the benefits, due and admissible within a period of three months from the date of receipt of the certified copy of the order. 6. With the aforesaid observations, petition stands disposed of. ( Sanjay Karol ), Judge. May 12, 2011 (rana)