Research › Search › Judgment

Jharkhand High Court · body

2018 DIGILAW 178 (JHR)

Navin Kumar Singh v. State of Jharkahnd

2018-01-19

PRAMATH PATNAIK

body2018
JUDGMENT : Pramath Patnaik, J. In the instant writ application, the petitioners have, inter alia, prayed for issuance of writ of certiorari for quashing the Notification dated 13.11.2001 (Annexure-2) by which two different and distinct pay-scales have been fixed for the same post of Reader in contravention of the University Grants Commission Package and Article 39-D of the Constitution of India. The petitioners have further prayed for direction to the respondents to fix an uniform and similar pay-scale for the post of Reader as per the UGC package, as both doing the same duty, having similar eligibility, qualification and process of appointment is also the same and further for quashing of Annexure-7, especially part 3 (i) and 3 (ii) by which the condition has been imposed so far as it relates to Sidhu Kanhu University. 2. All the petitioners were working as Reader with due concurrence and recommendation by the Bihar State University and working in different Departments and Colleges under the Sidhu Kanhu University and have been promoted vide different orders under the time bound statute. While continuing, as such, the respondents came up with arbitrary fixation of cut off date i.e. a person given promotion prior to 01.03.1989 and post 01.03.1989, two pay-scales have been given though both the categories were working and performing the same duty and there was no rationale nexus or object, which was sought to be achieved by fixing the cut-off date assigned by the respondents. Vide notification dated 13.11.2001 (Annexure-2), the State Government came out with notification by which two different scales of Reader has been fixed against UGC scheme/package though in the same letter, stated that UGC package has been adopted and accepted by the State in toto except enhancement of superannuation age, but, in spite of that, two scales of Reader have been fixed without any nexus or object. The University Grants Commission has recommended only one pay-scale of Reader but the State Government without any rationale nexus, has fixed two pay-scales. The University Grants Commission has recommended only one pay-scale of Reader but the State Government without any rationale nexus, has fixed two pay-scales. In similar matter, decided by the Hon'ble Rajasthan High Court in W.P. (S) No. 2558 of 1998, it has been held that there cannot be two discriminatory scales of pay as per Annexure-4 to the writ application and also the Hon'ble Apex Court has rendered the well-settled law 'equal pay for equal work' in terms of Article 39 (D) of the Constitution of India reported in AIR 1988 SC 1505. During pendency of the writ application, the respondents came out with letter dated 31.05.2005 by which certain conditions have been imposed and on fulfillment of the said condition, the scale of pay of Rs.12,000-420-18,300/-will be admissible to the petitioners and other similarly situated persons. Similar issue came up before the Hon'ble Patna High Court, which has been reported in 2005 (4) PLJR 174 , wherein, the Hon'ble Court has been pleased to hold that condition put for the scale is without any rational and without a purpose to achieve any object and the same are violative of right guaranteed to teachers under Article 14 of the Constitution of India. In view of the order passed by the Hon'ble Patna High Court, the State of Bihar has struck down the impugned condition and has accepted the UGC package dated 27.07.1998 and given the arrears with effect from 01.01.1996. The case of the petitioners stand in the same footing and the petitioners are entitled to be extended with the same benefit as per the order dated 28.09.2005 vide Annexure-15 to the supplementary affidavit. It has further been stated in the supplementary affidavit that as per Annexure-16, dated 31.12.2008, 6th UGC package, which came into existence, has recognized only one pay-scale of Reader and also speaks about the incentive for Ph.D. or M-phil degree holder. Left with no other alternative and efficacious remedy, the petitioners have preferred the present writ application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for redressal of their grievances. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the action of the respondents-authorities in fixing two different pay-scales on the ground that the petitioners are similarly situated persons amounts to arbitrary exercise of power, being bereft of jurisdiction. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the action of the respondents-authorities in fixing two different pay-scales on the ground that the petitioners are similarly situated persons amounts to arbitrary exercise of power, being bereft of jurisdiction. Learned counsel for the petitioners further submits that the respondents have acted in contravention of UGC package and in contravention of Articles 14, 16 and 300 A of the Constitution of India. Learned counsel for the petitioners further submits that the case of the petitioners is squarely covered by the decisions dated 20.06.2017, passed in W.P. (S) No. 4162 of 2013. 4. Repudiating the averments made in the writ application, counter affidavit has been filed by the respondents, wherein, it has been submitted that Time Bound Promotion Scheme which has been introduced by the Statute dated 24.12.1986 is not a UGC Scheme of promotion. The State Government taking a lenient view introduced the Scheme of Time Bound Promotion Scheme for those Universities teachers who were not able to get the promotion under UGC Scheme, so the petitioners cannot claim for the benefit which is admissible under the UGC Scheme as per Annexure-A to the counter affidavit. It has further been submitted that the petitioners have been promoted under the Time Bound Promotion Scheme introduced by the State Government. The Respondent-State has made a provision to grant pay-scale of Rs.3,000-5000/-to such Readers, who have been promoted after 01.03.1989 under the aforesaid promotion scheme, whereas, the Readers promoted prior to 01.03.1989, have been given the pay-scale of Rs.3,700-5,700/-. Since the petitioners have been promoted after 01.03.1989, so they were given the pay-scale of Rs.3,000-5,000/-in the 4th pay revision. It has further been stated that the Jharkhand State Government in the Department of Human Resources Development vide letter dated 13.11.2001 revised the pay scale of the teachers of the Universities/Colleges and V.C./Pro.-V.C. of the Universities in the 5th UGC pay-scale. By this pay revision, the pay-scale of Rs.3,000-5,000/-has been revised in the pay-scale of Rs.10,000-325-15,200/-, whereas, the pay-scale of Rs.3,700-5,700/-has been revised in the pay-scale of Rs.12,000-425-18,300/-as per Annexure-B to the counter affidavit. However, it has been submitted that the Jharkhand State Government in the Department of Human Resources Development, vide letter dated 31.05.2005 decided to give benefits of the pay-scale of Rs.12,000-425-18,300/-to the Readers of the Universities/Colleges, who were getting pay-scale of Rs.10,000-325-15,200/-with certain conditions. However, it has been submitted that the Jharkhand State Government in the Department of Human Resources Development, vide letter dated 31.05.2005 decided to give benefits of the pay-scale of Rs.12,000-425-18,300/-to the Readers of the Universities/Colleges, who were getting pay-scale of Rs.10,000-325-15,200/-with certain conditions. Since the petitioners are neither holding requisite qualification for promotion fixed by the UGC i.e. the degree Ph.D. nor they have been given their option to change their designation as lecturer (Selection Grade), they are not entitled for the pay-scale of Rs.12,000-18,300/-. 5. A counter affidavit has been filed by the respondent-university, wherein, it has been submitted that the pay-scale of Readers promoted before and after 01.03.1989 were fixed in two different scale of Rs.3,700-5,700/-and Rs.3,000-5,000/-in accordance with the Government Notification dated 13.11.2001 and the University is bound to act in pursuance of the Government Notification dated 13.11.2001. 6. After bestowing my anxious consideration to the rivalized submissions and on perusal of the documents, the case of the petitioners is squarely covered by the decision of this Court rendered in W.P. (S) 4162 of 2013, dated 20.06.2017 and the learned counsel for the petitioners also submits that the petitioners are entitled to be extended with the same benefits. Viewed thus, the impugned Notification dated 13.11.2001 vide Annexure-2 and the letter dated 31.05.2005 vide Annexure-7 relating to the Sidhu Kanhu University are quashed and set aside and the respondents are directed to extend the benefits of the pay-scale of Rs.12,000-425-18,300/-in place of Rs.10,000-325-15,200/-, along with the arrears of pay-scales with effect from 01.01.1996. Accordingly, the respondent-State is further directed to take immediate steps for providing the replacement scales alongwith the arrears as expeditiously as possible and preferably within a period of 16 weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the order. 7. With the aforesaid direction, the writ petition stands allowed. Petition allowed.