Research › Search › Judgment

Orissa High Court · body

2010 DIGILAW 373 (ORI)

Benudhar Bej v. State of Orissa

2010-05-20

D.K.SAHU

body2010
JUDGMENT Dr. D.K. SAHU, MEMBER (JUDICIAL) — The applicant’s submission, in brief, is that he joined as a teacher on 13.8.1956. He has passed 10th class. He was sent to take up elementary training and after completion of the training, he worked as a non-matric trained (10th class E.T.) teacher since 11.7.1959. He was to get pay in the scale of Rs.80-3-110/- with effect from 1.4.1961. But he was paid the less scale of Rs.75-1-90/-. Consequently, his pay was fixed at a lower scale in the corresponding scale of Rs.75/- - 90/- while pay was revised in accordance with Orissa revised scale of pay rules in the year 1974. The applicant having been denied of that scale (Rs.80/- - 100/-), has filed representation before the concerned authority, but no order has been passed thereon. It is submitted that the applicant has been denied of the higher pay payable in every month. He has been drawing less pay consequently pension in every month. He has filed this application for fixation of his pay in the scale of Rs.80-3-110/-with effect from 1.4.1961 in accordance with ORSP rules 1961 and re-fixation of his pay time to time corresponding to that scale applicable to him in accordance with ORSP rules 1974, 1981, 1989 etc, so also to grant him TBA scale in accordance with the rules. 2.Respondent No.1 has filed written counter. The crux of the counter, as contained in para-2 thereof, is that the claim of the applicant to fix his pay in the scale of Rs.80-3-110 with effect from 1.4.1961 instead of Rs.75 to 90 is not applicable to him, because the scale of pay Rs.80-3-110/- was applicable to non-matriculate E.T. primary school teachers. The applicant was not sent up for matriculation examination. He was 9th pass M.E. E.T. So, his pay was fixed in the scale of Rs.75-90/-. 3.We have heard the learned counsel for both sides at length and perused the respective pleadings and documents annexed thereto. 4.Copy of pay rules 1975 placed at Annexure-2 reveals that the non-matric E.T. teachers were to get scale of Rs.80-110/-, whereas the class 9th pass trained teachers were to get Rs.75-90. The applicant submits that he was a non-matric E.T. 5.In 1950’s and 1970’s matric pass certificate was issued on passing 11th class. Thus by then 11th class was matric class. The applicant had E.T. qualification, that has not been controverted. The applicant submits that he was a non-matric E.T. 5.In 1950’s and 1970’s matric pass certificate was issued on passing 11th class. Thus by then 11th class was matric class. The applicant had E.T. qualification, that has not been controverted. The service book of the applicant has been maintained by the concerned authority and it has its own authenticity. Copy thereof placed at Annexure-1 reveals that the applicant was 10th pass E.T. trained. In the counter it has not been controverted. The respondents have filed document at Annexure A/3, revealing that the applicant was reading in 11th class. The applicant had produced copy of certificate granted by the Board of Secondary Education Orissa with a memo dated 10.12.08. This reveals that the applicant having roll No. 15149 had appeared matriculation examination in the year 1963, but he failed. The aforesaid documents amply establish that the applicant was studying in 11th class, but he failed in 11th class. He having passed 10th class and having studying in 11th class, he was a non-matric E.T. The contention of the respondents that he was 9th pass E.T. is not sustainable, may, negatived by their own document i.e. the entry in Annexure-1 and the document at Annexure-3. Thus it is held that the applicant was a non-matric E.T. teacher and was entitled to get the scale of Rs.80-3-110/- in accordance with 1961 ORSP rules. The respondents take a plea that the claim of the applicant at a belated stage, is not maintainable, so the O.A. should be dismissed on the ground of delay. 6.The applicant is to get higher pay in every month, consequently his pension is to be revised in accordance with the higher scale of pay and he was to get that higher pension in every month. It is a continuing cause of action. So, no time is fixed to claim the pay. (referred to the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of M.R. Gupta vrs. Union of India 1995 SCC (L & S) 1273). 7.Accordingly, it is directed that the pay of the applicant be fixed in the scale of pay of Rs.80-3-110/- in accordance with 1961 ORSP rules with effect from 1.4.1961. (referred to the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of M.R. Gupta vrs. Union of India 1995 SCC (L & S) 1273). 7.Accordingly, it is directed that the pay of the applicant be fixed in the scale of pay of Rs.80-3-110/- in accordance with 1961 ORSP rules with effect from 1.4.1961. It then be re-fixed in the corresponding scale of pay of Rs.255-5-285-7-340/- in accordance with ORSP Rules, consequently he be granted the corresponding revised scale of pay as per the ORSP rules framed time to time. He is also entitled to get T.B.A. scale in accordance with Govt. finance department letter dated 22.5.1995. 8.It is thus directed that his arrear pay be accordingly calculated after fixing his pay, as directed above, inclusive of T.B.A. scale from the appropriate date. His pension be accordingly revised as per rules. 9.This exercise be completed within six months from communication of this order and the amount be paid to him within a month there from. 10.The O.A. is accordingly allowed. No order as to cost. O.A. allowed.