The Delhi High Court dismissed appeals by Punjabi Academy and Directorate of Education, Government of Delhi (GNCTD), holding that decades-old denial of minimum wages to part-time language teachers violates Article 14 and amounts to exploitation prohibited under Article 23 of the Constitution. The Court clarified that where part-time language teachers appointed by an academy funded and controlled by GNCTD are deployed in MCD schools and have rendered continuous teaching service for decades, their entitlement to salary at 50% of the pay scale of regularly appointed full-time teachers flows directly from the mandatory provisions of Rule 101(2) of the Delhi School Education Rules, 1973.
The High Court asserted that State cannot defeat this statutory entitlement by raising distinctions based on educational qualifications, particularly where the teachers were appointed pursuant to advertisements prescribing those qualifications and have continued in service for 22 to 29 years. The Court added that denial of even minimum wages to such teachers constitutes arbitrary State action violative of Article 14 and exploitative practice prohibited under Article 23 of the Constitution.
Also read SC Asks Tamil Nadu to Approach CWMA Over Alleged Shortfall in Proportionate Cauvery Water Share
The Division Bench comprising the Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya and Justice Tejas Karia observed that part-time teachers, regardless of the academy engaging them, are statutorily entitled to salary and allowances at one-half of what is paid to regularly appointed full-time teachers, and the State cannot contract out of this statutory mandate. The Court rejected the State’s attempt to distinguish part-time Punjabi teachers from Urdu teachers in Durraj Fatima on the ground that Punjabi teachers lacked B.Ed degrees, holding that since they were appointed pursuant to advertisements stipulating their qualifications, and have continued teaching for decades, their qualifications cannot now be used as a ground to deny them the benefit of the earlier precedent.
The Court clarified that teachers appointed prior to the notification dated Aug 23, 2010 issued under Section 23(1) of the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act fall within the exempted category and cannot be denied wage parity on the ground of not meeting higher qualification norms prescribed thereunder. The Court observed that part-time teachers performing teaching duties along with administrative work like paper-setting, invigilation, and evaluation were being paid less than half of the minimum wage fixed for unskilled labour under the Labour Department’s Sep 26, 2024 notification, which shocks the conscience and amounts to exploitation prohibited by the Constitution.
Drawing from the Supreme Court’s ruling in Sukhendu Bhattacharjee v. State of Assam [2026 SCC OnLine SC 909], the Bench held that the practice of retaining part-time teachers for decades under deceptively titled designations while extracting regular work integral to school administration is constitutionally impermissible and violates Article 14 as arbitrary State action.
Briefly, the intra-Court appeals has been filed by Punjabi Academy and the Directorate of Education, Government of Delhi (GNCTD) against the judgment passed by the Single Judge, whereby petitions filed by part-time Punjabi teachers were allowed. The Punjabi Academy is a society registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1860, fully funded, supervised and controlled by GNCTD, which introduced the Punjabi Language Teaching Scheme to promote Punjabi language in schools run by the Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD) across Delhi.
The majority of the petitioners were initially appointed between 1986-1991, except two teachers who were appointed in 2004 and 2010, and were posted in various MCD schools. Their monthly wages started at Rs.500/- to Rs.600/-, which were increased over the years, and ultimately, as per the Cabinet decision dated May 28, 2016, the remuneration was fixed based on Consumer Price Index Norm, ranging from Rs.6,580/- to Rs.8,885/- per month depending on qualifications.
The petitioners approached the Court claiming that they were entitled to at least 50% of the salary being paid to regularly appointed Assistant/Primary Teachers, relying on the Division Bench judgment in Durraj Fatima Naqvi v. Govt. of NCT of Delhi [W.P.(C) No. 13296/2009] and the judgment in Rani v. Government of NCT of Delhi [W.P.(C) No. 8541/2014]. The Single Judge directed re-fixation of salaries at 50% of the salary of regularly appointed teachers within 8 weeks, payment of arrears within 4 weeks thereafter, and interest @ 6% per annum from the dates due till actual payment.
