Re-Fixation Of Salary Only Possible Under Existing Rules, No Vested Right Of Teacher To Claim Enhanced Pay For Being Overqualified: Calcutta HC Larger Bench

In a 187-page order, a larger bench of the Calcutta High Court comprising Justices Harish Tandon, Soumen Sen, and Kaushik Chanda have held that teachers in the State of West Bengal cannot seek re-fixation of salary due to having attained higher educational qualifications during the course of their employment, in absence of any rules for such re-fixation of salary.

In deciding the reference arising out of common questions of law in multiple cases, the bench held:

Enhancement of pay on acquisition of higher qualification during the service career is dependent upon the relevant rules operating at the time of acquisition of higher qualification and cannot be claimed as a matter of right in absence of Rules. If a teacher has consciously applied for a post under the pass graduate category in spite of having an Honours Graduate/Post Graduate qualification he/she/they cannot claim as a matter of right higher pay scale [for being overqualified.] The claim of higher pay scale on acquiring higher degree cannot be considered to be a vested right and elevated to a legal right. It is no more than a reasonable expectation. 

The bench held that a teacher with a higher or better educational qualification would undoubtedly be at an advantage for the educational institution, and should not be deprived of benefits or increments, but the same could not encourage backdoor entry for teachers who have joined in the pass graduate category and thereafter on improvement of their qualification claim higher scale of pay.

State cannot be 'saddled with financial burden' of paying enhanced scale to overqualified teachers when post for which appointment was made doesn't require those qualifications

Court held that although teachers with higher educational qualifications would be allowed to apply for posts which did not require such high levels of qualifications, the State could not be burdened with meeting their demand for enhanced pay by virtue of being overqualified.

It observed that when the post for which an appointment is made, did not require a candidate with an Honours or Post graduate degree, the state would not be required to grant enhanced scale of pay for those teachers with higher qualifications since they would be overqualified for the classes for which they were appointed.

Court observed that this was the reason that while laying down the eligibility criteria the authorities take into consideration the suitability of the candidate for the post.

It held that the State was required to make a budgetary allocation to meet salaries and allowances of teachers, and as such it cannot be asked to pay enhanced scale for acquiring higher qualifications during the course of employment, or to those who had consciously participated in the recruitment for a post that did not require higher qualification

Re-fixation of teachers' salary can only be decided based on existing Rules

The bench further observed, that while an enhanced scale could not be granted to overqualified teachers, the re-fixation of salary as prayed for in many of the writ petitions, could only be decided based on the existing Rules, which did not provide for enhanced pay for overqualified candidates who consciously applied to posts requiring lower qualifications. 

It held that a change in policy if not arbitrary, or affecting a vested or fundamental right should not be interfered with since an expert body, conversant with the rules, realities and requirements of students and educational institutions had framed the rules.

The claim of higher pay scale on acquiring higher degree cannot be considered to be a vested right and elevated to a legal right. It is no more than a reasonable expectation. However, such expectation must arise from the course of dealings and conducts, the Court held.

Enhanced pay for overqualification not vested right, but teacher can seek reasonable accommodation from State to consider suitable increments

It was held that although enhanced pay scale would not be a vested right for overqualified teachers, they could seek reasonable accommodation from the state to consider increments for them in view of stagnation or lack of opportunity for promotion.

Undoubtedly, a teacher with a better and higher qualification can be an advantage to an educational institution and it is expected that the teacher should not be deprived of increments and/or incentives, the Court observed.

It, however, hastened to add that such a move could not encourage the back door entry of teachers who consciously joined a lower qualification post and sought higher pay as a vested right after improvement of qualification. 

There could be instances where an Honours graduate or post graduate candidate may suppress qualification and participate in the selection process in the pass graduate category and take the easy path and avoid competing with candidates who are Honours graduate and/or Post graduate for the selection to Honours and/or Post graduate category with the hope to utilize such degree after joining to claim higher scale of pay, the Court observed.

Accordingly, the Court answered the reference in the negative and held that enhancement of pay on acquisition of higher qualification during the service career is dependent upon the relevant rules operating at the time of acquisition of higher qualification and cannot be claimed as a matter of right in absence of Rules.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Cal) 40