Judgment Heard Mr. DN Bhattacharyya, learned counsel for the appellant and Mr. D Saikia, learned Addl. Advocate General, Assam for the respondents. Writ Appeal has been filed against the judgment and order dated 24.09.2008, passed by the learned Single Judge, dismissing the writ petition, being WP(C) No. 8368/2002 filed by the appellant. Question for determination is whether the Junior Engineers, upon their upgradation to Senior Grade, would be entitled to fixation of initial pay under FR 22(1) (a) (1) or FR 22 (1) (a) (2). The above question has arisen in the context of the following factual background. Assam Diploma Engineers Service Association (appellant hereafter) is an association of Diploma Engineers working in the Works Department of the State of Assam, such as Public Health Engineering, Flood Control (now Water Resources), Irrigation and Public Works Department. Diploma Engineers working in the cadre of Junior Engineers in the above Departments complained of stagnation in their service. To remove such stagnation, the Assam Pay Commission, 1988, recommended creation of a Senior Grade in the post of Junior Engineer with higher pay scale. The recommendation of the Pay Commission found acceptance in the Assam Services (Revision of Pay) Rules, 1990. Thus, a senior cadre of Junior Engineer (Senior Grade) was created with a higher pay scale having gazetted status. The Rule, however, provided that upgradation to the post of Junior Engineer (Senior Grade) would be admissible on fulfillment of the following conditions: - 1) Completion of 8 years of service as Junior Engineer, 2) Number of posts in the Senior Grade should be restricted to 10% of the cadre strength of Junior Engineer, and 3) Upgradation shall be on the basis of selection. According to the appellant, the State thereafter promoted 446 Junior Engineers to Junior Engineer (Senior Grade) and fixed their pay under the provisions of FR 22 (1) (a) (1). Subsequently, the Finance Department issued office memorandum holding that the pay of an incumbent, such as Junior Engineer, upgraded to Senior Grade would be required to be regulated by the provisions of FR 22 (1) (a) (2) and not FR 22 (1) (a) (1) as was earlier decided. The aforesaid decision was challenged by the appellant before this Court by filing a writ petition, which was registered and numbered as CR No. 4244/1998. The aforesaid decision was challenged by the appellant before this Court by filing a writ petition, which was registered and numbered as CR No. 4244/1998. The said writ petition was disposed of by a Single Bench of this Court vide order dated 26.03.2002, directing the Govt. of Assam to constitute a High Level Committee for determination of the matter. Following the order of this Court, a High Powered Committee was notified by the State Govt. on 20.05.2002. The High Powered Committee took a decision on 22.08.2002 that there is no difference in the nature of duties and responsibilities between Junior Engineers and upon their upgradation as Junior Engineer (Senior Grade). The High Powered Committee therefore opined that pay of Junior Engineers (Senior Grade) should be fixed under FR 22 (1) (a) (2). Following the view taken by the High Powered Committee, Finance Department, Govt. of Assam issued communication dated 06.09.2002 informing the appellant about the decision so taken. Aggrieved, the related writ petition i.e., WP(C) No. 8368/2002 was filed. In the meanwhile, appellant submitted representation before the Chief Minister raising various grievances, including the issue of fixation of pay in the Senior Grade on upgradation. Following a discussion held between the Chief Minister and the appellant, Sri JP Rajkhowa, the then Addl. Chief Secretary to the Govt. of Assam, was entrusted to look into the above grievance of the appellant. Sri Rajkhowa recommended fixation of pay of the Junior Engineers (Senior Grade) under FR 22 (1) (a) (1). The said recommendation was notified whereafter the same was implemented by the Irrigation Department. The above fact was brought to the notice of the learned Single Judge by the appellant by filing a miscellaneous application. A Single Bench of this Court passed order dated 13.02.2004 disposing of the writ petition by directing the State to take follow up action in terms of the Govt. notification based on the recommendation of Sri Rajkhowa. With such direction, the writ petition was closed. Against the order dated 13.02.2004, the Finance Department, Govt. of Assam filed appeal being WA No. 261/2004, which was allowed by the Division Bench by order dated 08.11.2005. Order of the Single Bench dated 13.02.2004 was set aside and the matter was remanded for de novo consideration by the Single Bench on merit. Against the order dated 13.02.2004, the Finance Department, Govt. of Assam filed appeal being WA No. 261/2004, which was allowed by the Division Bench by order dated 08.11.2005. Order of the Single Bench dated 13.02.2004 was set aside and the matter was remanded for de novo consideration by the Single Bench on merit. On remand, learned Single Judge heard elaborate arguments advanced on behalf of both the sides, and, by a detailed judgment dated 24.09.2008, dismissed the writ petition holding that initial pay of a Junior Engineer on being upgraded as Junior Engineer (Senior Grade) has to be regulated by the provisions of FR 22 (1) (a) (2). Hence, the writ appeal. Since the entire issue revolves around applicability of either FR 22 (1) (a) (1) or FR 22 (1) (a) (2), it would be apposite to refer to the aforesaid provisions at the outset, which reads as under: - “22(1) The initial pay of a Government servant who is appointed to a post on a time scale of pay is regulated as follows: (a) (I) Where a Government servant holding a post, other than a tenure post, in a substantive or temporary or officiating capacity is promoted or appointed in a substantive, temporary or officiating capacity, as the case may be, subject to the fulfillment of the eligibility conditions as prescribed in the relevant recruitment Rules, to another post carrying duties and responsibilities of greater importance than those attaching to the post held by him, his initial pay in the time-scale of the higher post shall be fixed at the stage next above the notional pay arrived at by increasing his pay in respect of the lower post held by him regularly by an increment at the stage at which such pay has accrued. Save in cases of appointment on deputation to an ex-cadre post, or to a post on ad hoc basis, the Government servant shall have the option, to be exercised within one month from the date of promotion or appointment, as the case may be, to have the pay fixed under this rule from the date of such promotion or appointment or to have the pay fixed initially at the stage of the time scale of the new post above the pay in the lower grade or post from which he is promoted on regular basis, which may be refixed in accordance with this rule on the date of accrual of next increment in the scale of the pay of the lower grade or post. In cases where an ad hoc promotion is followed by regular appointment without break, the option is admissible as from the date of initial appointment/ promotion, to be exercised within one month from the date of such regular appointment: Provided that where a Government servant is immediately before his promotion or appointment on regular basis to a higher post drawing pay at the maximum of the time scale of the lower post, his initial pay in the time scale of the higher post shall be fixed at the stage next above the pay notionally arrived at by increasing his pay in respect of the lower post held by him on regular basis by an amount equal to the last increment in the time scale of the lower post. (2) When the appointment to the new post does not involve such assumption of duties and responsibilities of greater importance, he shall draw as initial pay, the stage of the time scale which is equal to his pay in respect of the old post held by him on regular basis, or, if there is no such stage next above the stage equal to his pay in respect of the old post held by him on regular basis: Provided that where the minimum pay of the time-scale of the new post is higher than his pay in respect of the post held by him regularly, he shall draw the minimum as the initial pay : Provided further that in a case where pay is fixed at the same stage, he shall continue to draw that pay until such time as he would have received an increment in the time scale of the old post in cases where pay is fixed at the higher stage he shall get his next increment on completion of the period when an increment is earned in the time scale of the new post. On appointment on regular basis to such a new post, other than to an ex-cadre post on deputation, the Government servant shall have the option to be exercised within one month from the date of such appointment for fixation of his pay in the new post with effect from the date of appointment to the new post or with effect from the date of increment in the old post. …………………………………………………………………………………………” A careful examination of the aforesaid two provisions would show that the two provisions lay down the manner in which pay of an incumbent in the higher scale of pay is to be fixed on promotion/upgradation to a higher post. FR 22 (1) (a) (1) would be attracted if the promoted/upgraded post involves discharge of duty and responsibility of greater importance than those attached to the post earlier held by the incumbent. FR 22 (1) (a) (2) would be applicable in a case where the promoted/upgraded post does not involve assumption of duties and responsibilities of greater importance. The effect of applicability of FR 22 (1) (a) (1) is that it would result in extra increment. FR 22 (1) (a) (2) would be applicable in a case where the promoted/upgraded post does not involve assumption of duties and responsibilities of greater importance. The effect of applicability of FR 22 (1) (a) (1) is that it would result in extra increment. Coming to the present case, there is no dispute that on upgradation/promotion from Junior Engineer to Junior Engineer (Senior Grade), the incumbent would be entitled to higher scale of pay. The bone of contention is that if the provisions of FR 22 (1) (a) (1) is held to be applicable, it would result in additional increment to the promotees. Therefore, in the light of the above, the controversy boils down to the question as to whether on their upgradation/promotion to the Senior Grade, Junior Engineers discharge duties and responsibilities of greater importance than what they discharge. For this purpose, we have already noticed that on the direction of this Court, a High Powered Committee was constituted, which opined that Junior Engineers (Senior Grade) discharge same duties and responsibilities as Junior Engineers. Recommendation of the High Powered Committee dated 22.08.2002 reads as under: - “During the discussion, all the members of the works departments unanimously apprised that factually there is no difference in entrustment and performance of works of the Junior Engineers (Sr. Grade) and Junior Engineers. There are also no departmental rules, manuals or O.M. through which specific duties and responsibilities were separately entrusted to the Junior Engineers (Sr. Grade) and the Junior Engineers of the works departments. In view of the above, it was decided that there is no difference of works, duties and responsibilities amongst the Junior Engineers (Sr. Grade) and the Junior Engineers. The Sr. Grade scale of pay is mainly extended with the objective of providing a higher scale of pay to the long experienced Junior Engineers. In view of the position as above, the Committee did not find any justification to the claim of allowing fixation benefit in the scale of pay of Junior Engineer (Sr. Grade) under FR 22 (1) (a) (1) of the FRs and SRs. Rather it is found justifiable to fix the pay under FR 22 (1) (a) (2).” This is a finding of fact arrived at by the High Powered Committee after thorough discussion between the participants representing all the Works Department as well as the Finance Department. Grade) under FR 22 (1) (a) (1) of the FRs and SRs. Rather it is found justifiable to fix the pay under FR 22 (1) (a) (2).” This is a finding of fact arrived at by the High Powered Committee after thorough discussion between the participants representing all the Works Department as well as the Finance Department. In this respect, learned Single Judge held as follows: - “22. The determination of the question involved i.e. whether the post of Senior Grade Junior Engineer carries higher duties and responsibilities than other Junior Engineers is essentially a question of fact. Such a question in the first instance has to be decided by the experts in the field or even by the authorities of the Administrative Departments that may be involved. There are inherent limitations in the performance of such a task by the Courts, as pointed out by the Apex Court in the case of Secretary, Finance Department and others (Supra). The role of the Courts in such matters, therefore, would be to evaluate the process by which the decision had been reached by the authorities to ensure that no unjust treatment or arbitrary action by the State is disclosed. In the present case by the communication dated 6th September, 2002, the petitioner has been informed that the High Powered Committee constituted by the Court had arrived at a decision that there is no difference of works, duties and responsibilities between the Junior Engineer (Senior Grade) and other Junior Engineers and, therefore, the High Powered Committee did not find any justification for allowing fixation of pay of Junior Engineers (Senior Grade) under FR 22 (1) (a) (1); rather, it was concluded by the High Powered Committee that such fixation of pay should be under FR 22 (1) (a) (2).” Though a different view was taken by the then Addl. Chief Secretary, Sri JP Rajkhowa, the same was subsequently clarified by the State. Chief Secretary, Govt. of Assam filed an affidavit before the learned Single Judge stating that the earlier writ appeal was filed by the Finance Department with the approval of the Chief Secretary and that the stand taken in the writ appeal as well as in the affidavit filed by the Finance Department reflects the stand of the State Government in the matter. of Assam filed an affidavit before the learned Single Judge stating that the earlier writ appeal was filed by the Finance Department with the approval of the Chief Secretary and that the stand taken in the writ appeal as well as in the affidavit filed by the Finance Department reflects the stand of the State Government in the matter. The Chief Secretary further informed the Court that the entire matter was once again reviewed and it was the unanimous view that there is absolutely no difference in the nature of duties performed and responsibilities shouldered by the Junior Engineers (Senior Grade) and the Junior Engineers serving in the Works Departments. Accordingly, it was declared that pay of the Senior Grade Junior Engineers should be fixed under FR 22 (1) (a) (2). Thus having regard to the discussions made above, we are of the considered opinion that there is no infirmity in the view taken by the learned Single Judge. Challenge to the order of the learned Single Judge lacks merit and is untenable. Writ Appeal is accordingly dismissed, leaving the parties to bear their own costs.