9911796707
TMI Blog2008 (4) TMI 750X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 1.1986. On the said post, he was placed on a scale of pay of ₹ 1200-2200/-. A scheme for grant of time bound promotion to a higher scale of pay was formulated by the Board wherefor a circular bearing No.17/90 was issued by its Finance Department on 23.4.1990. In terms of the said scheme, promotional scale was to be given to the employees upon completion of 9/16 years of regular service. The revision in the scale of pay of LDCs was directed by an order dated 3.10.1990 w.e.f. 1.1.1986. The said revision of scale of pay, however, was to be granted on the basis of total number of years of service as LDC in the said cadre. The same was, however, implemented in respect of three categories of employees, namely, who have not been granted any promotion despite completion of minimum 10 years of service as LDC and Senior Clerk or five years of service as LDC and remaining of the LDCs not falling in the first two categories. The ratio for grant of the said promotional scale was fixed at 40:40:20 respectively. Material part of the said circular is as under : In continuation to this officer order Nol.129/Fin/PRC-1988 dated 11.11.1988, No.147/ Fin/PRC-1988 dated 21.03.89, No.168/Fin/PRC- 1 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f such employees and their serial number in the list be informed. While fixing of these employees in this revised scale of 1500-2640 from 01.01.88, instructions issued by the Board from time to time be kept in view. It is also informed that above scale granted to these LDCs can be reviewed by the Board. 6. Another circular was issued by the Board on or about 18.7.1994 directing that those LDCs who are promoted as UDCs would not be given any option to decide UDC/LDC as their induction post, but some relaxation may be given while considering individual cases who had been promoted after 1.1.1986 in the following terms : Thereafter Union of Employees submitted demands that those qualified Lower Division Clerks who have been promoted as Upper Division Clerks after 01.01.1986 be also given opportunity to exercise option as he been given to Lower Division Clerks who were promoted before 01.01.86. The Board has considered the entire case and has decided that they cannot be given opportunity to exercise such option because Lower Division Clerks have already accepted three pay scales structure on the pattern of Punjab Government and they were working as Lower Division Clerks ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... C after 01.01.1986 but it was decided that hardship caused to these employees will be considered on merits. It is, therefore, submitted that hardship caused to me by drawing higher pay scale and my basic pay by employees junior to me be removed and I be granted pay scale of ₹ 1500-2640 w.e.f. 01.01.88 and pay scale of ₹ 1640-2925 on completion of 16 years service and my salary be fixed accordingly because I have been bearing this hardship for the last 6/7 years. Kindly remove this hardship at an early date. 8. Another Finance Circular was issued on 31.10.1995 in terms whereof, it was clarified that for giving the benefit of time bound promotional scheme after 9/16/23 years of regular service, the induction post is to be treated as under : After considering this case and as per scheme made by the Board vide office order No.197/Fin/PRC-988 dated 23.4.1990, it is clarified specially that one employee is entitled for getting benefits of one induction post only during his whole service. On the points raised by some officers the clarification is being given as per following : I. Those Divisional Accountants who are getting 8 years proficiency step up and 9 years ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ale of pay only at one induction level. 11. The writ petition filed by the appellant questioning the legality and/or validity of the said order has been allowed by reason of the impugned judgment. 12. Mr. Gulati, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant, in support of the appeal, inter alia, would submit : (i) The High Court committed a serious error insofar as it failed to take into consideration that the Board, in exercise of its regulation making power, was entitled not only to make regulations but also to issue circulars from time to time. As the validity of the circular letters issued by the Board had not been questioned, the impugned judgment is wholly unsustainable. (ii) The High Court failed to consider the purport of the circulars and in any event having not quashed any of them was not correct in granting the reliefs in favour of the respondents herein. 13. Ms. Rani Chhabra, learned counsel for the respondent, on the other hand, would submit that i) Other employees having been granted the benefit of requisite option, there was absolutely no reason why the respondent should be discriminated against; ii) As the Punjab High Court, in a similar ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 0-2925 (Second time bound scale after 16 years of service) The validity of the provisions of the said regulations is not in question. The power of the Board to issue circulars from time to time in support of the matters which are not governed by the statute or statutory regulations is also not in dispute. The Board, as noticed here in before, had been issuing such regulations from time to time. It is now well settled that the Board, even in absence of any express provision of statute, may issue such circular. 17. In Meghalaya State Electricity Board Anr. v. Jagadindra Arjun [(2001) 6 SCC 446, it was held : 11. As per Section 79(c), MSEB may frame regulations not inconsistent with the provisions of the Act and the Rules providing for the duties of officers and other employees of the Board and their salary, allowances and other conditions of service. It is to be stated that this is an enabling provision. MSEB may frame regulations as provided in Section 79(c) of the Act, but in the absence of any regulations, MSEB can lay down service conditions by administrative order/instructions. Section 15 of the Act empowers the Board to appoint its employees as may be required to e ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... was in the aforementioned situation, the employee therein was being treated as a Lower Division Clerk. The special leave petition thereagainst has been dismissed by a Bench of this Court by an order dated 31.3.2000 in Punjab State Electricity Board Ors. v. Supinder Kumar Modgil [SLP (C)___/2000 (CC No.2119/2000)]. 20. Our attention has further been drawn to a decision of another learned Single Judge of the High Court in Chanan Singh v. Punjab State Electricity Board, Patiala RSA No.337 of 1988 wherein, inter alia, it was held : A senior person who has proved his merit vis-`- vis the others in the same cadre would be placed in the lower scale of pay while the juniors who were either not qualified or had been found unsuitable for promotion would be placed in higher scale of pay. Such a course of action would be arbitrary, unfair and would even amount to denial of equality of opportunity in promotion. I am reluctant to accept any interpretation of the order of revision of pay scales which would deny the benefit of higher scale to a senior and result in grant of a higher scale to a junior. Mr. Goyal points out that the grant of a higher scale to the extent of 50% of the posts of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and not the employer. 25. In State of Punjab Anr. v. Kuldip Singh Anr. [(2002) 5 SCC 756], the power of the Board to issue circulars was reiterated, stating : 9. From the contents of the two circulars, it is manifest that an employee in order to be eligible to get the selection grade pay has to complete 15 years' of service and he is not to be given such scale of pay before he fulfils the said eligibility criteria. It follows as a consequence that no employee can claim selection grade pay before completing 15 years of service on any ground including the ground that an employee junior to him has already been given such grade of pay. The position is further clarified in the circular issued in May 1987 wherein it is provided that in the event of a junior employee getting the selection grade pay earlier, the post in the said grade may be kept vacant for the senior employee who may be given the benefit of the pay prescribed for the selection grade pay only after he completes 15 years of service. The interest of the senior employee in such cases is safeguarded by making the provision that the inter se seniority between the two employees will remain undisturbed despite the ju ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n but it has not been denied or disputed that in the implementation of the policy decision of the Board dated 3.10.1990, respondent had been receiving an amount which is far less than the one which was being received by his juniors. In the case of Gurdeep Singh, we have seen that whereas the representation of his juniors had been allowed, his representation had been rejected. This may meet the requirements of law but we, having regard to our extra-ordinary power under Article 142 of the Constitution of India, may also pass some order which would meet the ends of justice. We say so not on ipse dixit but on the premise that even in terms of Fundamental Rules 22(1)(a), there exists a provision for stepping up of pay. The said principle would be applicable when a junior to a senior officer belonging to the same category and the post from which they have been promoted and in the promoted cadre, the junior officer on being promoted later than the senior, gets a higher pay. Technically the same may or may not be permissible but we may notice that this Court in Union of India Ors. v. P. Jagdish Ors. [(1997) 3 SCC 177] applied the same principle, stating : This being the principl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s all- India seniority must prevail even while making local officiating appointments within any Circle. The question is basically of administrative exigency and the difficulty that the administration may face if even short-term vacancies have to be filled on the basis of all-India seniority by calling a person who may be stationed in a different Circle in a region remote from the region where the vacancy arises, and that too for a short duration. This is essentially a matter of administrative policy. But the only justification for local promotions is their short duration. If such vacancy is of a long duration there is no administrative reason for not following the all-India seniority. Most of the grievances of the employees will be met if proper norms are laid down for making local officiating promotions. One thing, however, is clear. Neither the seniority nor the regular promotion of these employees is affected by such officiating local arrangements. The employees who have not officiated in the higher post earlier, however, will not get the benefit of the proviso to Fundamental Rule 22. 30. Although the order of the Board cannot be said to be wholly illegal and without jurisdi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
