Research › Search › Judgment

Gauhati High Court · body

2018 DIGILAW 1346 (GAU)

Trailokya Kalita v. State of Assam

2018-09-13

NELSON SAILO

body2018
JUDGMENT : Nelson Sailo, J. Heard Mr. C. Bhattacharyya, the learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. D. P. Borah, the learned Standing Counsel, Health Department appearing for the respondent Nos. 1, 2 and 3. Mr. R. Borpujari, the learned Standing Counsel, Finance Department appears for the respondent Nos. 4 and 5. 2. This is the second time, the petitioners is before this Court. The 2 (two) petitioners were appointed as Museum Keeper under the establishment of the respondent No. 3 w.e.f. 11.01.1993 and 16.08.1991 respectively. On their appointment, they were given the pay-scale of Rs. 930-1735/ P.M. According to the petitioners, the pay scale of Museum Keeper at the time of their appointment was Rs. 1065-2095/- P.M. The petitioners both being matriculate, claim that they should be given the pay-scale of matriculate Museum Keeper like other Museum Keeper in Medical Colleges in the State of Assam w.e.f. the date of their appointment. The further claim of the petitioners is that with the Revision of Pay, 1998 coming into force, they will be entitled to the re-fixation of their pay-scale as well. With such grievance, the petitioners had approached this Court by filing WP(C) No. 2942/2014. This Court after noticing that the pay up-gradation of the petitioners was in fact already recommended by the Director of Medical Education, Assam to the Commissioner and Secretary to the Government of Assam, Health & Family Welfare Department disposed the writ petition vide order dated 13.06.2014 directing the Commissioner and Secretary to the Government of Assam, Health & Family Welfare Department to consider the case of the petitioners for their pay up-gradation/re-fixation of their pay in light of the proposal made by the Director of Medical Colleges in Assam. 3. Pursuant to the said direction, the respondent No. 3 initiated a proposal to the respondent No. 2 requesting the said authority to get the approval of the Govt. for re-fixation of the pay of the petitioners as per the Revision of Pay, 1998 w.e.f. their joining the respective services. The arrear amount payable to both the petitioners were also indicated. 4. for re-fixation of the pay of the petitioners as per the Revision of Pay, 1998 w.e.f. their joining the respective services. The arrear amount payable to both the petitioners were also indicated. 4. When the respondent No. 2 forwarded the proposal to the respondent No. 1, the respondent No. 1 through the Deputy Secretary to the Government of Assam, Health & Family Welfare Department sought resubmission of the proposal by showing the budget provision for the current financial year and the creation of post vide communication dated 15.05.2015 (Annexure-IV). Consequently, the respondent No. 3 vide his communication dated 25.06.2015 (Annexure-VI) informed the Deputy Secretary to the Government of Assam, Health & Family Welfare Department about the budget provision as well as the post creation while indicating the financial involvement i.e. the arrear salaries due to the petitioners on re-fixation of pay as well. 5. The same Deputy Secretary again vide communication dated 02.11.2015 sought for certain information and clarifications from the respondent No. 2 regarding the qualification prescribed for the post of Museum Keeper, service rules to the post etc., amongst others. The clarification as sought for was furnished by respondent No. 3 to the respondent No. 2 whereafter, the same was communicated to the respondent No. 1. After such clarification was made, the concurrence of the Finance Department was sought and consequently, the Finance Department (EC-III) informed the Health & Family Welfare Department to take necessary action as per the Revision of Pay Rules of 2010 (R.O.P Rules of 2010). It was also stated that the approval of the Finance Department in the Pay Research Unit was obtained vide U/OFPC45/2016 dated 07.06. 2016. The said communication was made on 15.06.2016. 6. Despite the approval given by the Finance Department, since the pay of the petitioners was not re-fixed as per their entitlement, the petitioners are again before this Court. Against the writ petition, the respondent No. 1 has filed affidavit-in-opposition on 06.12.2017. At paragraph No. 2 of the said affidavit, the stand taken is that the process for re-fixation of pay-scale of the petitioners in terms of the concurrence given by the Finance (EC-III) Department was under process and necessary action as per the R.O.P Rules of 2010 is being done. At paragraph No. 2 of the said affidavit, the stand taken is that the process for re-fixation of pay-scale of the petitioners in terms of the concurrence given by the Finance (EC-III) Department was under process and necessary action as per the R.O.P Rules of 2010 is being done. Having regard to the stand taken by the respondent No. 1, this Court vide order dated 17.08.2018 asked the learned Standing Counsel for the Health & Finance Welfare Department i.e. Mr. D.P. Borah to obtain necessary actions and apprise this Court about the status of the process said to be undertaken by the respondent authorities. The learned counsel however submits that he requires further time. 7. Having regard to the case projected by the petitioners and the stand taken by the respondents, I am of the considered view that the writ petition need not be kept pending any longer and the process of re-fixation of pay of the petitioners as per the ROP Rules of 2010 should be under taken expeditiously. 8. In that view of the matter, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents more particularly respondents Nos. 1 and 2 to complete the process of re-fixation of the pay of the petitioners as per the ROP Rules of 2010 as expeditiously as possible and not later than 2 (two) months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. While re-fixing the pay-scale of the petitioners, the respondents shall also taken into account the arrear salaries entitled to the petitioners. 9. With the above observations and directions, this writ petition stands accordingly disposed of.