HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL. (Court’s order whether the case is or not approved for reporting) (Chapter VIII Rule 32 (2)(b) Description of the Case. Writ Petition No. 762 (S/S) 2006 Smt. Kamla Tewari. … Petitioner Vs. State of Uttarakhand And 4 others. … Respondents Approved for reporting. _____________________ Not approved for reporting. Date of Decision 31st July, 2007 . Initial of Judge. ________________ ________________ Reserved IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL (1)Writ Petition no. 762 (S/S) 2006 (Leading Case) Smt. Kamla Tiwari W/o Kailash Chandra Tiwari R/o Aagar Inter College Tandi Pokhrad District Nainital ------- Petitioner Versus 1. State of Uttarakhand through Additional Secretary, Education Govt. of Uttarakhand, Dehradun 2. Director of Education (Secondary) Uttarakhand, Dehradun 3. District Education Officer, Nainital 4. Manager, Committee of Management Aagar Inter College Tandi Pokhrad, District Nainital 5. Principal, Aagar Inter College, Tandi Pokhrad, District Nainital ------- Respondents AND (2)- Writ Petition no. 2008(S/S) 2005 Manoj Kumar and four others. ------Petitioners Vs. State of Uttarakhand and five others. -----Respondents AND (3)- Writ Petition no. 347(S/S) 2006 Sunita Maheshwari and two others ------Petitioners Vs. State of Uttarakhand and three others. -----Respondents AND (4)- Writ Petition no. 661(S/S) 2006 Ganga Prasad Pant. ------Petitioner Vs. State of Uttarakhand and four others. -----Respondents AND (5)- Writ Petition no. 944(S/S) 2006 Smt. Mukta Chaudhary. ------Petitioner Vs. State of Uttarakhand and three others. -----Respondents AND (6)- Writ Petition no. 2022(S/S) 2005 Suresh Singh and two others. ------Petitioners Vs. State of Uttarakhand and three others. -----Respondents AND (7)- Writ Petition no. 768(S/S) 2006 Narayan Singh Karmyal ------Petitioner Vs. State of Uttarakhand and three others. -----Respondents AND (8)- Writ Petition no. 323(S/S) 2006 Devendra Kumar Sharma ------Petitioner Vs. State of Uttarakhand and three others. -----Respondents AND (9)- Writ Petition no. 672(S/S) 2006 Sanjeev Kumar Singh. ------Petitioner Vs. State of Uttarakhand and four others. -----Respondents AND (10)- Writ Petition no. 660(S/S) 2006 Vivek Kumar. ------Petitioner Vs. State of Uttarakhand and four others. -----Respondents AND (11)- Writ Petition no. 498(S/S) 2006 Rajendra Singh Rawat and two others. ------Petitioners Vs. State of Uttarakhand and three others. -----Respondents AND (12)- Writ Petition no. 673(S/S) 2006 Shish Pal. ------Petitioner Vs. State of Uttarakhand and four others. -----Respondents AND (13)- Writ Petition no. 674(S/S) 2006 Rajeev Chaturvedi ------Petitioner Vs. State of Uttarakhand and four others. -----Respondents AND (14)- Writ Petition no. 879(S/S) 2006 Smt. Rajesh Sharma and another. ------Petitioners Vs. State of Uttarakhand and three others. -----Respondents AND (15)- Writ Petition no. 961(S/S) 2006 Roshan Singh Rawat. ------Petitioner Vs. State of Uttarakhand and five others. -----Respondents AND (16)- Writ Petition no. 1041(S/S) 2006 Gulab Singh Padiyar. ------Petitioner Vs. State of Uttarakhand and five others. -----Respondents AND (17)- Writ Petition no. 1077(S/S) 2006 Pushpa Upadhyay. ------Petitioner Vs. State of Uttarakhand and three others. -----Respondents AND (18)- Writ Petition no. 1124(S/S) 2006 Sanjay Kumar Singh. ------Petitioner Vs. State of Uttarakhand and four others. -----Respondents AND (19)- Writ Petition no. 1215(S/S) 2006 Manbar Singh. ------Petitioner Vs. State of Uttarakhand and four others. -----Respondents AND (20)- Writ Petition no. 1231(S/S) 2006 Jagdish Singh Bhandari. ------Petitioner Vs. State of Uttarakhand and four others. -----Respondents AND (21)- Writ Petition no. 1232(S/S) 2006 Madan Mohan Patni. ------Petitioner Vs. State of Uttarakhand and four others. -----Respondents AND (22)- Writ Petition no. 671(S/S) 2006 Navin Chandra. ------Petitioner Vs. State of Uttarakhand and four others. -----Respondents AND (23)- Writ Petition no. 1095(S/S) 2006 Satish Chandra Nautiyal and another. ------Petitioner Vs. State of Uttarakhand and three others. -----Respondents AND (24)- Writ Petition no. 653(S/S) 2006 Mohit Gupta. ------Petitioner Vs. State of Uttarakhand and three others. -----Respondents AND (25)- Writ Petition no. 1691(S/S) 2005 Umesh Chandra. ------Petitioner Vs. State of Uttarakhand and three others. -----Respondents Sri S.N. Babulkar, Sr, Adv., Sri M.C. Kandpal, Sr. Adv., Sri Chetan Joshi, Adv., Sri Ganesh Kandpal, Adv. Sri B.D. Upadhyay, Adv. Sri D.S. Mehta, Adv., Sri Kamlesh Tewari, Adv. Sri I.S. Mehra, Adv., Sri Prabhar Joshi, Adv. and Sri Rajeev Shrama advocate, learned counsel for the petitioners. Sri Paresh Tripathi, learned Standing Counsel for the State, AND, Sri Ashish Joshi, Adv., Sri Manoj Tewari, Adv., Sri R. Dobhal,, Adv., Mrs. Gauri Deo Devi, Adv., Sri Vinay Upadhyay, Adv., Sri Vijay Bhatt, Adv., Sri M.C. Pandey, Adv., Sri G.S. Negi, Adv., Sri S.S. Rawat, Adv. Sri Subhash Upadhyay, Adv. and Sri A.K. Bisht, Advocate for the private respondents. Hon’ble M.M. Ghildiyal, J. In all these petitions the petitioners are aggrieved with the Govt. Order dated 20th September 2003 by which the Govt. has declined payment of honorarium to such Teachers who have been appointed by the Parent Teacher Association after 5th September 2003. The petitioners are also aggrieved with the G.O. dated 19th October 2005 by which the Government has issued directions that the appointments can be made by the aided Colleges, leaving the posts occupied by the PTA Teachers. Some of the petitioners have challenged the advertisement issued by the Committee of Management to fill up the post against which they are working. On 20th September 2003, Government issued order stipulating therein that the P.T.A. teachers, who were appointed on or before 05.09.2003, possessed the requisite qualification and were eligible for holding the said posts and have been selected and appointed by the Parent Teachers Association shall be provided honorarium @ Rs. 25/- per period, 6 period per day upto maximum of Rs. 4,000/- per month, however, vide subsequent Govt. Order dated 24th October 2003, the limitation prescribed for 6 periods in a day has been withdrawn and direction was issued to make payment @ of Rs. 4000/- per month. The petitioners are working in different recognized and aided institutions in the State of Uttarakhand. The services of the petitioners in these petitions are governed by the Provision of Intermediate Education Act 1921 and the Regulation framed under this Act. Payment of Salary Act 1971 is also applicable to the Institutions in which the petitioners are serving. In some of the petitions publication of posts is sought to be quashed. In s0me petitions the petitioners have sought their regularization on the posts held by them. In most of the petition the petitioners have prayed to issue a writ in the nature of mandamus commanding and directing the respondents to ensure payment of full salary as is admissible to the regularly appointed L.T. Grade teachers or at least to pay admissible honorarium @ of Rs. 4,000/- per month in pursuant to Government Order dated 20.09.2003 alongwith the arrears from the date of their appointment. As the petitioners have challenged the cut of date stipulated by the Government vide its G.O. dated 20th Sep. 2003, by which the PTA Teachers who have been appointed after 5th September 2003 have been declined for payment of honorarium, thus for the sake of convenience all the writ petitions have been consolidated and are being decided by a common judgment. The Writ Petition No. 762 (S/S) of 2006 is treated as a leading case. The Uttarakhand School Education Act, 2006, Act No. 8 of 2006 was enacted and came into force w.e.f. 22nd April, 2006. under Section 41, provision has been made for ad hoc appointment of part time teacher/Acting Parent Teachers Association Teachers by Committee of Management. It is provided that the Committee of Management shall appoint on ad hoc basis such part time PTA Teachers as were employed up to 05.09.2003 by the Committee of Management from its own resource, for which substantive posts were created at the time and who possessed qualification prescribed for the corresponding posts and who were paid honorarium from the Government funds. Prior to enforcement of the aforesaid Act, Uttar Pradesh Intermediate Education Act, 1921 and the Regulations framed thereunder were adopted by the State of Uttarakhand. Certain provisions of U.P. Intermediate Education Act, 1921 as well as Regulations relating to appointment of Teachers under Parent Teachers Association (hereinafter referred to as the PTA) are relevant for the proper adjudication of the case, are as under:- 7AA. Employment of Part-time Teachers or Part- time Instructors:- 1. Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, the Management of an Institution may, from its own resources, employ- (i). as an interim measure part-time teachers for imparting instructions in any subject or group or subjects or for a higher class for which recognition is given or in any section of an existing class for which permission is granted under Section 7-A: (ii). part-time instructors to impart instruction in moral education or any trade or craft under socially useful productive work or vocational course. 2. No recognition shall be given and no permission shall be granted under Section 7-A, unless the Committee of Management furnishes such security in cash or by way of Bank Guarantee to the Inspector as may be specified by the State Government from time to time. 3. No part-time teacher shall be employed in an institution unless such conditions may be specified by the State Government by order in this behalf are complied with. 4. No part-time teacher or part-time instructor shall be employed unless he possesses such minimum qualifications as may be prescribed. 5. A part-time teacher or a part-time instructor shall be paid such honorarium as may be fixed by the State Government by general or special order in this behalf. 6. Nothing in this Act shall preclude a person already serving as a teacher in an institution from being employed as a part- time teacher or a part-time instructor under Section 7-AA.” Section 9, sub-Clause (4) of Uttar Pradesh Intermediate Education Act, 1921 provides “Whenever in the opinion of the State Government, it is necessary or expedient to take immediate action, it may, without making any reference to the Board under the foregoing provisions, pass such order or to take such other action consistent with the provisions of this Act as it deems necessary, and in particular, may, by such order modify or rescind or make any regulation in respect of any matter and shall forthwith inform the Board accordingly.” This power of State Government is disciplinary power and is not subject to challenge and, in fact, it is an emergent power which can be exercised in any contingent situation. There was an acute shortage of teachers in Secondary Education and despite of so many efforts made by the State Government, the Government could not fill up the vacant post of teachers by making permanent arrangement. Since the Teachers as well as the students were facing great inconvenience in view of shortage of teachers, therefore, in view of its constitutional obligation, as the education has been regarded to be a fundamental right of the student and the mandate of Article 37 of the Constitution of India enjoins on the Government a constitutional obligation to bring Laws or make appropriate measures or implementing the fundamental rights and directives as soon as possible, therefore, in furtherance of this constitutional obligation and emergent situation arisen by non availability of regular teachers, the Government worked out on via media for providing teachers in the institutions through Parent Teachers Association (PTA) and, consequently, the regulation namely Abhibhawak Adhyapak Association Regulation 1986 has been framed inter-alia with the object to provide aid and assistance to Committee of Management and the Principal of the Institution for the effective functioning of such type of Institutions. Main purpose of constitute the Association is to propose the management to provide them qualified teachers by the fund collected by the Association out of its own resources. The aims for which the Association is to be constituted under the Regulations of 1986 have been provided under Regulation 3 of Regulations, which are as under:- ^^ ,lksfl,’ku ds mn~ns’;& ,lksfl,’ku ds fuEufyf[kr mn~ns’; gksaxs& ¼1½ laLFkk vkSj LFkkuh; lekt ds ikjLifjd lEcU/k dks c<+kukA ¼2½ laLFkk dh leL;kvksa dh tkudkjh izkIr djuk vkSj LFkkuh; lekt ds HkkSfrd] vkfFkZd vkSj uSfrd lg;ksx ls muds fujkdj.k ds fy, iz;kl djukA ¼3½ laLFkk esa ubZ ’kSf{kd ;kstukvksa ds lapkyu vkSj fdz;kUo;u ds fy;s LFkkuh; lekt dk lg;ksx izkIr djukA ¼4½ LFkkuh; lekt dh ’kSf{kd ,oa O;olkf;d vko’;drkvksa dh igpku dj muds vuqdwy uohu fo"k;ksa dks ikB~; fo"k;ksa esa lekos’k djus dh laLrqfr djukA ¼5½ fo|ky; ;FkkFkZ esa LFkkuh; lekt dk vkyksd LrEHk gSA bl Hkkouk dks lEiq"V djukA ¼6½ laLFkk esa v/;;ujr Nk=ksa ds lkaLd`frd ,oa ’kSf{kd mUu;u ds fy;s ;kstuk;sa ,oa dk;Zdze cukus esa ekxZn’kZu ,oa lg;ksx nsuk] vkSj ¼7½ izcU/k lfefr ,oa iz/kkukpk;Z dh laLFkk ds lqpk#:i ls lapkyu ds fy;s ijke’kZ ,oa lg;ksx nsuk] ftlesa laLFkk ds izcU/kdh; iz’kklu esa gLr{ksi djuk lfEefyr ugha gSA One of the object of the Association as is clear from No. 7 provided under Regulation 3 is to co-operate the Principal and the Committee of Management for smooth functioning of the Institution and under this object, teachers were appointed by the PTA in the institution on honorarium basis either paid by the Association itself or by the Management from its own resources. Under the intimation to the Government and concerned authorities, the managements have to accept the proposals sent by the Committee. The petitioners having knowledge that post of L.T. Grade is vacant in a particular Institution and also have knowledge that the Parent Teacher Association/ Management is going to make appointment against the vacant post, the petitioners have applied for the post to the Parent Teacher Association/management. The Selection Committee has been framed comprising the Chairman, members of Parent Teacher Association, the Manager, the Principal and two experts of the particular subject vacant in the Institutions. Accordingly, the managements of different Institutions has accepted such teachers appointed by the Abhibhawak Adhyapak Association –Parent-Teacher Association (for short P.T.A. Teachers) and they are functioning as substitute to the regular teachers against the existing vacancies. In most of the petitions, the petitioners have claimed that they have been appointed against existing vacant post, after adopting full procedure of selection. As alleged by the petitioners, since they were appointed as L.T. Grade Teacher in the Institution and are continuing on the posts, however instead of paying admissible honorarium to the tune of Rs. 4000/-, they are being paid a meager sum per month. Further the grievances of the petitioners is that the Committee of Managements wholly illegally and arbitrarily without considering the petitioners’ regularization have advertised the vacant post of L.T. Grade Teachers held by them. In some cases the posts held by the petitioners have been shown to be a reserved category post and in some cases the posts on which candidates of reserve category are working, the same has been advertised as General Category Post. In the writ petition No. 762 (ss)2006 as also in some other writ petitions, this Court, as an interim measure, has passed the following order:- “Heard Sri S.N. Babulakar, Sr. Advocate assisted by Sri Anil Bisht, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned standing Counsel for the respondents nos. 1 and 3. Issue notices to respondent nos. 4 and 5 returnable at early date. Respondents may file counter affidavit within a period of ten days. The submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that petitioner was appointed teacher under PTA Scheme on 10.08.2004 and still continuing on the post in Aagar Inter College, Tandi, Pokhrad District-Nainital. The Director of Education, has already issued a letter dated 14.11.2005 that the posts which are being occupied by the Teachers appointed under PTA Scheme may not e advertised. In spite of this order passed by Director of Education, the post which is being held by the petitioner has been advertised vide advertisement dated 30.05.2006 issued by the Committee of Management, Aagar Inter College, Tandi Pokhrad, District-Nainital. In view of the aforesaid facts, respondents are directed not to proceed further to fill up the post which is being held by the petitioner in pursuance to the advertisement dated 30.05.2006. However, respondents may proceed further for rest of the posts. In the meantime, respondents shall pay Honorarium of Rs. 4,000/- to the petitioner as prescribed in the Government Order dated 20.09.2003. After exchange of the pleadings, this Court on 7th December 2006 has passed the following order in Writ Petition No. 762(S/S) of 2006:- “…Learned counsel for respondent no. 4 argued that the selection process is held up due to the interim order dated 14.06.2006, granted by this Court, as such, there is no urgency to hear the matter. Heard learned counsel for the parties. Admit the writ petition. Counter and rejoinder affidavits have already been exchanged. Lest this writ petition for final hearing in the week commencing on 19th February, 2007. The interim order dated 14.06.2006, is extended till the next date of listing, only. It is clarified, that the selection process is not stayed by this Court, in respect of any other post except the one held by the petitioner. This arrangement was in existence since long. On 1st May 2002 information in regard to the existing PTA Teachers in the State was supplied to the Authorities by each of the District Education Officers of the State for placing the same before the Legislative Assembly, in pursuance to the question put up before the Assembly by the member of the legislative Assembly. Vide Government Order dated 20th September, 2003, as order was passed to pay honorarium to the teachers appointed under the scheme at the rate of Rs. 25/- per period and to the maximum of Rs. 4,000/- per month. This amount of honorarium was to be paid to the teachers from Government Exchequer. Order dated 20th September, 2003 issued by the Uttarakhand Government is reproduced as under:- **izs"kd] lat; dqekj] vij lfpo] mRrjkapy 'kklu lsok esa] funs’kd] fo|ky;h f’k{kk] 2 lqHkk"k jksM] nsgjknwu ek/;fed f’k{kk vuqHkkx nsgjknwufnukad 20 flrEcj] 2003 fo"k;% v’kkldh; lgk;rk izkIr fo|ky;ksa esa dk;Zjr ih0Vh0,0 f’k{kdksa ds ekuns; dk HkqxrkuA egksn;] mi;qZDr fo"k;d vkids i= la[;k& f’k0fu0@453@2003&04 fnukad 19-7-2003 ds lUnHkZ esa eq>s ;g dgus dk funsZ’k gqvk gS fd jkT;iky egksn; v’kkldh; lgk;rk izkIr ek/;fed fo|ky;ksa esa v/;kid vfHkHkkodksa ,lksfl,’ku }kjk p;fur ,sls v/;kid tks mDr in dh vgZrk j[krs gSa] dks :0 25-00 izfr oknu dh nj ls izfrfnu 06 oknu dh lhek rd vf/kdre :0 4]000@& :i;s pkj gtkj ekk= izfrekg ekuns; ds Hkqxrku dh vuqefr iznku djrs gSaA 2- iz’uxr O;oLFkk f’k{kk funs’kd }kjk fuEuor~ miyC/k djk;s x;s fooj.kkuqlkj orZeku esa miyC/k f’k{kdksa dh la[;k dh lhek rd gh ykxw gksxhA dzekad tuin dk uke v/;kidksa dh la[;k ek/;fed v/;kidksa dh la[;k lEc)izkbejh ;ksx 1 2 3 4 5 1 vYeksM+k 60 & 60 2 uSuhrky 60 & 60 3 ikSM+h 41 & 41 4 gfj}kj 93 & 93 5 m/keflaguxj 93 & 93 6 ckxs’oj 29 & 29 7 nsgjknwu 158 14 172 ;ksx 534 14 548 lEcfU/kr f’k{kdksa dks fo|ky; ds iz/kkukpk;Z@iz/kkuk/;kid ds lkFk layXu izk:i ij vuqcU/k fd;k tkuk vfuok;Z gksxkA Hkfo"; esa bl izdkj ls p;fur v/;kidksa ds lEcU/k esa fopkj lEHko ugha gksxkA** Thereafter on 24th October, 2003, another G.O. was issued by the State of Uttarakhand amending earlier G.O. dated 20.09.2003. By this Government Order, the condition of teaching six period was removed. The Government Order dated 24th October, 2003 is reproduced as under:- **izs"kd] ts0 ih0 tks’kh] vuq lfpo] mRrjkapy 'kklu lsok esa] funs’kd] fo|ky;h f’k{kk] 2 lqHkk"k jksM] nsgjknwu ek/;fed f’k{kk vuqHkkx nsgjknwufnukad 24 vDVwcj] 2003 fo"k;% v’kkldh; lgk;rk izkIr fo|ky;ksa esa dk;Zjr ih0Vh0,0 f’k{kdksa ds ekuns; dk HkqxrkuA egksn;] mi;qZDr fo"k;d 'kklukns’k la[;k& 647 @ek/;fed@ 2003 fnukad 20-09-2003 ds lUnHkZ esa ;g voxr djk;k tkuk gS fd mDr 'kklukns’k }kjk v’kkldh; lgk;rk izkIr ek/;fed fo|ky;ksa esa v/;kid vfHkHkkod ,lksfl,’ku }kjk p;fur ,sls v/;kid tks mDr in dh vgZrk j[krs gSa] dks :i;s 25-00 izfr oknu dh nj ls izfrfnu N% oknu dh lhek rd vf/kdre :0 4]000@& izfrekg ekuns; ds Hkqxrku dh vuqefr iznku dh xbZ FkhA 2& mDr 'kkluns’k ds dze esa 'kklu Lrj ij lE;d~ fopkjksijkUr eq>s ;g dgus dk funsZ’k gqvk gS fd jkT;iky egksn; v/;kid vfHkHkkod ,lksfl,’ku }kjk p;fur ,sls v/;kid tks mDr in dh vgZrk j[krs gksa] dks vf/kdre :0 4]000@& izfrekg ekuns; ds Hkqxrku esa izfrfnu N% oknu dh lhek ds izfrcU/k dks lekIr fd;s tkus dh lg"kZ Lohd`fr iznku djrs gSaA 3& mDr lanfHkZr 'kklukns’k fnukad 20-09-2003 bl lhek rd la’kksf/kr le>k tk;A 'kklukns’k ds vU; izfrcU/k ,oa O;oLFkk;sa ;Fkkor ykxw jgsaxhA** Another G.O. was issued on 12th December, 2003 clarifying the position that the honorarium shall be paid to only those PTA Teachers, who have been appointed against the post which is created in accordance with law and is still in existence and further the engagement can be made only after ensuring that other teachers appointed are having 36 period per week and even then there is a need of a teacher in the institution. No PTA Teacher may be appointed who is not qualified as per the qualification prescribed under the Act and further the engagement may be made after signing the contract, a proforma of which was also supplied by the Government. On 22nd May, 2004, further clarification was issued to remove the condition of payment of honorarium at the rate of Rs. 25/- per period to the PTA Teachers and now all PTA teachers working under the Scheme would get honorarium at the rate of Rs. 4,000/- per month. This order of 22nd May, 2004 is reproduced hereunder:- izs"kd] vkj0 ds0 lq/kka’kq] vij lfpo] mRrjkapy 'kklu lsok esa] funs’kd] fo|ky;h f’k{kk] 2 lqHkk"k jksM] nsgjknwu ek/;fed f’k{kk vuqHkkx nsgjknwufnukad 22 ebZ] 2004 fo"k;% v’kkldh; lgk;rk izkIr fo|ky;ksa esa dk;Zjr ih0Vh0,0 f’k{kdksa dks ekuns; dk HkqxrkuA egksn;] mi;ZqDr fo"k;d 'kklukns’k la[;k& 647 @ek/;fed @2003 fnukad 20-9-2003 rFkk 'kklukns’k la[;k 856@ek/;fed@2003 fnukad 24-10-2003 }kjk v’kkldh; lgk;rk izkIr ek/;fed fo|ky;ksa esa ih0Vh0,0 f’k{kdksa tks in dh vgZrk j[krs gSa dks :0 25@& izfroknu dh nj ls] vf/kdre :- 4000@& izfrekg dk ekuns; Lohd`r fd;k x;k FkkA mDr ds dze esa eq>s ;g dgus dk funsZ’k gqvk gS fd jkT;iky egksn; 'kklukns’k esa mfYyf[kr :0 25@& izfroknu dh nj ds izfrcU/k dks lekIr fd;s tkus dh lg"kZ Lohd`fr iznku djrs gSaA mDr 'kklukns’k bl lhek rd la’kksf/kr le>k tk;A ** Again on 02.09.2004, the Govt. issued order providing that the number of PTA Teachers working, has been enhanced (as the number of PTA Teachers shown in the Govt. Order dated 20.09.2003 was only up to 01.05.2002, while during the period 02.05.2002 to 05.09.2003 when the decision was taken for honorarium there was increase in the number of PTA Teachers in the State). However, the said G.O. provides that the number of PTA Teachers has been increased as per the number of PTA Teachers working in the State only upto 05.09.2003 and other conditions of the Govt. orders issued in that regard would remain the same. On 15.09.2004 the Director of Education issued directions to the District Education Officers stating that total number of PTA Teachers working in the State, district-wise, as on 05.09.2003 is mentioned and no honorarium shall be paid to the person appointed as PTA Teacher subsequent to 05.09.2003. The Govt. Order dated 15.09.2004 is based upon the Govt. Order dated 02.09.2004 which has been issued due to the cause that the Govt. Order dated 20.09.2003 was based upon the number of PTA Teacher working in the State as on 01.05.2002 and no order was issued in regard to the PTA Teachers who were engaged in different Institutions during the period 02.05.2002 to 05.09.2003 (when the decision was taken to provide honorarium to PTA Teachers). Order dated 15.09.2004 is reproduced hereunder:- ^^ izs"kd] funs’kd] fo|ky;h f’k{kk] 2 lqHkk"k jksM] nsgjknwuA lsok esa] leLr ftyk f’k{kk vf/kdkjh] mRrjkWpy] uSuhrkyA i=kad% ek/;fed@247&74&89@ih0Vh0,0@2004&05 fnukad 15 flrEcj] 2004 fo"k;% v’kkldh; lgk;rk izkIr fo|ky;ksa esa dk;Zjr ih0Vh0,0 f’k{kdksa dh iwoZ fu/kkZfjr la[;k ds vfrfjDr ih0Vh0,0 f’k{kdksa dks ekuns; ds Hkqxrku ds lEcU/k esa fn’kkfunZs’kA egksn;] ‘’kklukns’k la[;k&595@xxiv&2@2004] fnukad 2 flrEcj 2004 }kjk fuEukafdr rkfydk ds dkye&3 esa vafdr ih0Vh0,0 f’k{kdksa dh la[;k ds vfrfjDr dkye&4 esa vafdr la[;k Lohd`r dh x;h gSA bl lEcU/k esa 'kwP; gS fd 'kklukns’k la[;k 647@ek/;fed@2003 fnukad 20-9-2003] 'kklukns’k la[;k% 856@ek/;fed@ 2003 fnukad 24 vDVwcj] 2003 rFkk 'kklukns’k la[;k% 366@ xxiv&2@2004 fnukad 22 ebZ 2004 }kjk v’kkldh; lgk;rk izkIr ek/;fed fo|ky;ksa esa dk;Zjr ih0Vh0,0 f’k{kdksa dks