Research › Search › Judgment

Jharkhand High Court · body

2013 DIGILAW 1242 (JHR)

Amol Chandra Thakur v. State of Jharkhand

2013-11-19

APARESH KUMAR SINGH

body2013
ORDER 1. Heard counsel for the parties. 2. The grievance of the petitioner was in relation to fixation of his pay scale on the basis of 5th Pay Revision effective from 01st January 1996 which have not been done in the correct scale of pay of Rs. 6,500-10,500 by the respondent State authorities. The petitioner is said to have retired on 31st August 2004 while working on the Grade-III post of Assistant in Godda College, Godda where he had joined in August 1962 itself. 3. It is the contention of the petitioner that the pay scale was fixed under 4th Pay Revision and availed by the petitioner in the scale of Rs.1,640-2,900, as per Annexure-2 which is reduced in exercise of pay fixation by the respondent State authorities while implementing the 5th Pay Revision in respect of University and College in question by making it to Rs.1,400-2,300. As a result of such incorrect fixation of pay scale vide Annexure-1 by the respondent State, new revisional scale has also been incorrectly fixed at Rs.4,500-7,000 which needs to be corrected. In the aforesaid background, respondent authorities were specifically asked on earlier date to come out with their considered response. 4. The respondent State has filed supplementary counter affidavit and the University has also filed counter affidavit. From the averments made in the respective counter affidavits of the respondents, it appears that the respondent State as also the University have taken a stand that the petitioner's pay fixed by the University in the scale of Rs. 1,640-2,900 under the 4th Pay Revision effective from 01st January 1986 was itself wrongly done and had never been approved by the respondent State authorities i.e. Directorate of Higher Education, Government of Jharkhand. The matter relating to fixation of pay under the 5th Pay Revision was placed before the Directorate of Higher Education, Government of Jharkhand and the Ministry of Human Resources Development Department with a recommendation of the University that he should be entitled to the scale of Rs. 5,500-9,000. In an exercise conducted in May 2010 vide Annexure-1, State has taken a stand that the earlier pay fixation at Rs. 1,640-2,900 was not approved and the petitioner ought to have been in the scale of Rs. 1,400-2,300, the corresponding revised scale of pay of Rs. 4,500-7,000 only, but instead, the petitioner is claiming pay scale of Rs.6,500-10,500. 5. 5,500-9,000. In an exercise conducted in May 2010 vide Annexure-1, State has taken a stand that the earlier pay fixation at Rs. 1,640-2,900 was not approved and the petitioner ought to have been in the scale of Rs. 1,400-2,300, the corresponding revised scale of pay of Rs. 4,500-7,000 only, but instead, the petitioner is claiming pay scale of Rs.6,500-10,500. 5. This Court however fails to appreciate that the pay scale which has been granted under the 4th Pay Revision to the petitioner made effective from 01st January 1986, has been sought to be questioned in May 2010 by the respondent State authorities while fixing the pay scale under the 5th Pay Revision. As a matter of fact, the decision of the State Government amounts to reduction in the scale of pay earlier granted to the petitioner without giving any show-cause notice or opportunity to him. The University has also taken a stand that all along, the revised pay scale of Rs. 1,640-2,900 has been paid by them to the petitioner till his retirement. In such circumstances, there appears to be incoherent stand of the respondent University and the State as it appears that prior to May 2010, it could not be expected that the pay fixation under the 4th Pay Revision effective from 01st January 1986 had neither been considered or approved by the respondent State authorities earlier for at least more than ten years. 6. In these circumstances therefore, instead of getting into the exercise of fixation of correct scale of pay by this Court which is in the domain of financial expert, the writ petition is being disposed of by directing the Respondent No. 6 - The Director, Higher Education, Department of Human Resources Development, Government of Jharkhand, Ranchi to give opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and consider his grievances by passing a reasoned and speaking order. The petitioner would also make a representation containing all necessary facts and documents in support thereof before the respondent no. 6 along with a copy of this order. The Respondent No. 6 may also summon the official of the respondent University i.e. Respondent No. 3 - The Registrar, Sidhu Kanhu University, Santhal Pargana Division, Dumka in order to explain the stand of the University. 6 along with a copy of this order. The Respondent No. 6 may also summon the official of the respondent University i.e. Respondent No. 3 - The Registrar, Sidhu Kanhu University, Santhal Pargana Division, Dumka in order to explain the stand of the University. The Respondent No.6 shall also take into account all relevant records relating to pay fixation of non-teaching employees of the College and University in question before arriving at an informed decision in the matter. Let such an exercise be concluded within a period of sixteen weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order. This writ petition is disposed of in the aforesaid terms.