2008 Supreme(Pat) 1563
PATNA HIGH COURT
Chandramauli Kumar Prasad and Ravi Ranjan JJ.
Arun Kumar Shrivastava S/o Shri Bindeshwari Prasad
Versus
State Of Bihar
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 707 of 1997 ;
Decided On : OCTOBER 24, 2008
Headnote:Service Law-Disparity in pay scale, time bound promotion and enhancement of age of Superannuation from 58 to 60 years Demonstrator working in the Government Polytechnics inparts education leading to grant of diploma whereas Engineering Colleges imparts education for grant of degree- The responsibility of the Demonstrators working in the Government Polytechnics is not equal to that of the Demonstrators working in the Engineering Colleges Two constitute different and distinct class, hence the allegation of discrimination is absolutely misconceived-The status of Demonstrators working in the Government Polytechnics is not similar to that of the Demonstrator working in. the Engineering Colleges-Distinction made by the State Government between the Demonstrator of the Government Polytechnics and the Engineering Colleges is based on reasonable differentia and hence, the petitioners are not entitled to be treated similar to the Demonstrators working in the Engineering Colleges and thus, not entitled to the time bound promotion given to the later and also parity in the age of superannuation. (Paras 20 to 26)
1992 (2) PLJR 742-Relied upon.
CHANDRAMAULI KR.PRASAD and RAVI RANJAN JJ.
1. Prayer of the petitioners in both the writ applications are for issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to grant them the pay scale equal to the pay scale of the Demonstrators of the Engineering Colleges situated in the State of Bihar and that of the Bihar College of Engineering, Patna, revised from time to time alongwith the time bound promotion and further for enhancing the age of superannuation from 58 years to 60 years and the consequential benefits flowing from that.
2. For the purpose of adjudication, reference basically has been made to the pleadings in C.W.J.C. No. 707 of 1997.
3. Petitioners are Demonstrators in Government Polytechnics situated in different districts of the State of Bihar. An agreement was entered between the Federation of the University Teachers Association and the State Government, wherein it was decided that the Demonstrators of the Universities will be given time bound promotion. In the light of the aforesaid, the State Government resolved to grant time bound promotion to the Demonstrators working in the Universities and different Colleges in the State of Bihar. However, the said benefit was not given to the demonstrators working in one of the constituent college of the Magadh University and hence, demonstrators working in the said College filed C.W.J.C. No. 9368 of 1989 (Choudhary Rajendra Roy V/s. The State of Bihar and Ors.) before this Court, inter alia, praying for a direction to the respondents for grant of time bound promotion with effect from 1st of February, 1985. A Division Bench of this Court, by order dated 5.9.1991 (Annexure- 1), disposed of the writ application giving liberty to the petitioner of that case to file representation and the State Government in turn was directed to consider it taking into account its decision dated 11.1.1991, referred to above.
4. Another writ application bearing CWJC No. 522 of 1979 (Sundeshwari Prasad Singh and Others V/s. The State of Bihar and Others), was filed by the Graduate Laboratory Assistants working in Muzaffarpur Institute of Technology, Bhagalpur College of Engineering and Bihar Institute of Technology, Sindri, inter alia, praying for issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to designate them as Demonstrators and implement the University Grants Commission pay scale prescribed for Demonstrators with effect from 1.4.1973. The aforesaid relief was founded on the ground that the University Grants Commission pay scales have been implemented in the case of the employees of the Bihar College of Engineering, Patna put without any justification, they have been discriminated.
5. The aforesaid writ application was heard by a Division Bench of this Court and one of the Hon ble Judge constituting the Bench, directed the respondents to implement the University Grants Commission pay scale for the Demonstrators in the case of petitioners of the said case with effect from 1st of April, 1975. While doing so, the learned Judge observed as follows:-
"xxx It is, therefore, manifest that the discrimination made by the State Government in implementing U.G.C. scale of pay in case of counter-part of the petitioners in the Bihar College of Engineering, Patna, and refusing the same to the petitioners must be held to be discriminatory and without any reasonable cause. If the recommendation of U.G.C. scale of pay can be implemented in the case of Laboratory Assistants/Demonstrators of the Bihar College of Engineering, Patna, there is no reason why it should not be done in the case of the petitioners. For all these reasons, the second contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners must be accepted."
6. Another Hon ble Judge, constituting the Bench, agreed with the judgment aforesaid, but had assigned further reason. The Hon ble Judge in the concurring judgment, observed as follows:-
"xxx The following facts which clearly emerge from the admitted doc