IMPORTANT POINT
Clauses (a) and (b) of sub-rule (1) of Rule 8 of Orissa Revised Scales of Pay Rules, 1985 contemplate two different situations and exception clause contained therein is referable only to a situation occurring in clause (b) and not to be clause (a).

ORDER

Interpretation of Rules 8(1) (a) and (b) of the Orissa Revised Scales of Pay Rules, 1985 (for short the Rules ), purported to have been framed under Article 309 of the Constitution of India, falls for consideration in these appeals which arises out of the judgment and order dated 19th November, 1996. The respondents herein were holding the post of Lecturers and Professors in the University. The interpretation of the Rules arose in the context of a writ petition filed by the Lecturers and Professors of the Berhampur University Teachers Association in the High Court of Orissa. The pay scales of the Lecturers and Professors was Rs. 700-1600 and Rs. 1500-2500 respectively. By the aforesaid Rules, which came into force on 1st January, 1986, the scales of pay of the Lecturers and Professors were sought to be revised. The revised pay scales of the Lecturers and Professors was fixed of Rs. 2200-4000 and 4500-7300 respectively. On the relevant date i.e. immediately prior to 1st January, 1986, the Professors were getting Rs. 2927/- under the Rules.

2. The respondents filed a writ petition before the Orissa High Court, claiming therein that in addition the minimum of Rs. 4500-7300, one further increment is also to be given as required under Rule 8(1)(b).

3. At the time when the aforesaid writ petition was filed, a Division Bench of the High Court of Orissa in O.J.C. No. 2588 of 1991 took a view that while fixing the emoluments of the Teachers of the University under the UGC scales, an additional increment is to be given at the initial stage. However, another Division Bench in O.J.C. No. 6405 of 1992 was of the view that no such increment is to be given at the initial stage of fixation in the revised pay scales under the Rules. In view of the conflicting decisions of two coordinate Benches of the High Court, the writ petition filed by the Berhampur University Teachers Association was referred for decision to larger Bench.

Rules 8(1) (a) and (b) of the Rules reads as thus:

"8. (1) Unless in any case the University by special order otherwise directs, the pay of a University employee, who elects or is deemed to have elected to be governed by the revised scale from the 1st day of January, 1985 shall be fixed;

(a) at the minimum of the revised scale if the amount of the existing emolument is less than the minimum;

(b) at the stage of the revised scale, which is equal to the amount of existing emoluments or, if there is no such stage, at the stage next above the existing emoluments and the pay so fixed, except where it is fixed at the minimum shall be increased by one increment admissible at that stage of the revised scale."

4. The Full Bench of the Orissa High Court was of the view that although the case of the Teachers fall under Rule 8(1) (a), they are entitled to one further increment, in terms of the exception contained in Rule 8(1) (b); as a liberal construction is required to be put thereto, as the Rule is a beneficial one.

5. The Full Bench of the High Court, interpreting the aforementioned Rules, was thus of the opinion that the explanation contained in sub-clause (b) of clause (1) of Rule 8 would apply both to clauses (a) and (b) as the same in beneficial legislation.

6. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State of Orissa submits that a bare perusal of the impugned Rule would show that as two meanings cannot be put thereto, the Full Bench of the High Court must be held to have erred in passing the impugned judgment. Reliance in this behalf has been placed on Padma Sundara Rao (Dead) and Ors. vs. State of T.N. and Ors., reported in 2002 (3) SCC 533, Union of India and Anr. vs. Hansoli Devi and Ors., reported in 2002 (7) SCC 273, Dayal Singh and Ors. vs. Union of India and Ors., reported in 2003 (2) SCC 593 and Illachi Devi (D) by L.Rs. and Ors. vs. Jain Society, Protection of Orphans India and Ors., 2003 AIR SCW 4824.

7. Learned counsel for the respondents stated that the legislation has be