Jagdish Thakur v. Rajendra Agricultural University
2006-05-09
NARAYAN ROY
body2006
DigiLaw.ai
Judgment Narayan Roy, J. 1. Heard counsel for the petitioner, counsel for Rajendra Agricultural University and also JC to SC 4 for the State. 2. The petitioner is making a grievance against the resolution No. 4578 dated 14.10.2003, issued by the Agricultural Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna and also against the fixation of his pay by the University as contained in memo No. 3119, dated 13.11.2003. 3. Learned Counsel for the petitioner has tried to impress upon the Court that by these orders pay scale of the petitioner virtually has been downgraded in most arbitrary manner. It is submitted that by virtue of the annexure-4 the pay of the petitioner was fixed as Rs. 2650-4000.00 as per the 6th Pay Revision Committee Report as far back as in the month of February, 1999 and now in 2003 the same is being down-graded to a scale of Rs. 2650-3540.00 . By annexure-4 the pay of the petitioner is said to have been fixed by the University as per the 6th Pay Revision Committee Report, but the same was never given effect to in anticipation of the approval of the Government as required u/s. 25(2), Chapter 5 under the Bihar Agricultural University Act, 1987 . 4. The fixation of pay of the employees of the University in question is subject to approval by the State Government. The State Government now vide resolution dated 14.10.2003 has fixed the scale of the petitioner on the post of Pump Operator as Rs. 2610-3540.00 and the same now would be admissible to him. 5. It is not the case of the petitioner that fixation of pay made by the University in the scale of Rs. 2650-4000.00 was ever given effect to or the petitioner ever drew this scale. 6. Fixation of pay, as referred to above, by the University appears to be only a paper transaction in anticipation of the approval of the State Government. 7. Regard being had to the facts and circumstances of the case and in view of the fact, as referred to above, no interference is required in the matter so far as impugned resolution and orders are concerned. 8. This writ application is accordingly dismissed.