Research › Search › Judgment

Patna High Court · body

2003 DIGILAW 554 (PAT)

Raghunath Pd. Sinha v. State Of Bihar

2003-05-08

NARAYAN ROY

body2003
Judgment 1. Heard counsel for the parties. 2. By this writ application, the petitioner prays for issuance of a writ of mandamus commanding upon the respondents to grant him scale of Rs. 3200-4900, as he is working on the post of Compositor in Government Press, Gulzarbagh. 3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that the scale or Compositor and Corrector basically was fixed at Rs. 975-1540 but the same was revised to Rs. 3050-4590 and Rs. 3200-4900, respectively, discriminating the case of the petitioner. It is also submitted that since the basic pay of Compositor and Corrector was one and the same at Rs. 975-1540, the revised scale, therefore, should have been one and the same, but, in no case, discrepancy could have been shown in the pay scale of Compositor and Corrector. 4. A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the respondents stating therein, inter alia, that after 5th Pay Revision, the matter was referred to the Fitment Appellate Committee, where objections were entertained and the objections of the petitioner were referred to and the Fitment Appellate Committee refused to make any change in the revised pay scale of the Compositor. 5. From the pleadings of the petitioner, it appears that the petitioner after 5th Pay Revision filed objection before the authority concerned for fixing his pay at Rs. 4,000-6,000 as per the central rate and the same was forwarded to the Fitment Appellate Committee, which was not accepted. It is not the case of the petitioner that his prayer to maintain parity has been rejected by the Fitment Appellate Committee. 6. From the tenor of the representations filed by the petitioner, as contained in Annexures 5 to 9, it appears that the petitioner all through prayed for the higher scale, as for example at Rs. 4,000-6,000 and nowhere he prayed for maintenance of parity in the revised scale of Compositor and Corrector. At the face of Annexure 4. it appears that the basic pay scale of Compositor and Corrector was at Rs. 975- 1,540 and the same was revised to Rs. 3,050-4,590 and Rs. 3,200-4,900, respectively. The revised scale of Corrector appears to be much more higher than the revised scale of Compositor, even though their basic scale was fixed at Rs. 975-1,540. 7. it appears that the basic pay scale of Compositor and Corrector was at Rs. 975- 1,540 and the same was revised to Rs. 3,050-4,590 and Rs. 3,200-4,900, respectively. The revised scale of Corrector appears to be much more higher than the revised scale of Compositor, even though their basic scale was fixed at Rs. 975-1,540. 7. In the counter affidavit of the State, howhere it is stated as to how this disparity was allowed to perpetuate, when the basic pay scale of Compositor and Corrector was one and the same. 8. Since this question was not gone into by the Anomaly Removal Committee or Fitment Appellate Committee, this requires consideration by the State authority. 9. Under the circumstances, the petitioner, if so advised, may file his representation before respondent no. 2, Secretary-cum-Commissioner, Finance Department, Government of Bihar, Patna, ventilating his grievances and in case, it is so done, the same would be considered by respondent no. 2, who shall pass necessary order in accordance with law keeping in view the observations about the disparity in the revised pay scale of the Compositor and the Corrector. The decision must, however, be taken by respondent no. 2 within a period of three months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. 10. With the direction/observation aforesaid, this writ application is, accordingly, disposed of.