IMPORTANT POINT
The central legal point established in the judgment is that the petitioner was rightly granted the Second Higher Pay Scale from 1.2.2002 based on her service history, stepping up benefits, and the resolution dated 16.8.1994.

JUDGMENT :

1. By way of present petition, under Articles 14, 16 and 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has challenged order/communication dated 13.2.2012 passed by the Administrative Officer, Nagar Prathmik Sikshan Samiti, Vadodara whereby the representation made by the petitioner requesting the concerned authorities to rectify the mistake in taking into account the date of 1.2.2002 instead of 20.7.2001 while extending the benefit of Second Higher Pay Scale has been turned down.

2. With aforesaid grievance, the petitioner, in present petition, has prayed inter alia that:-

“7(A) Be pleased to admit this petition;

(B) Be pleased to issue appropriate writ, order or direction, quashing and setting-aside the communication/order dated 13.2.2012 made by respondent No.3 whereby the representation made by the petitioner for rectification of error crept up by the authorities while extending the benefit of 2nd higher pay scale w.e.f. 20.7.2001 instead of 1.2.2002 has been turned down and be pleased to hold that the petitioner is entitled to get the benefit of 2nd higher pay scale w.e.f. 28.7.2001 in the aforesaid peculiar facts and circumstances of the case;

(C) Be pleased to issue appropriate writ, order or direction, directing the concerned respondent authorities to extend the benefit of 2nd higher pay scale w.e.f. 20.7.2001 with all the consequential benefits in the aforesaid peculiar facts and circumstances of the case;

(D) Be pleased to pass such other and further orders as may be deemed fit in the interest of justice"

3. The brief facts giving rise to present petition are that the petitioner was initially appointed as Assistant Teacher by an order dated 17.7.1981. The petitioner was given appointment on adhoc basis by the aforesaid order. The petitioner had resumed her duties w.e.f. 20.7.1981. In view of the fact that the pay scale of one junior Assistant Teacher, namely, Shri Mahavir Prasad was more than that of the pay scale of the petitioner, the case of the petitioner was required to be considered for stepping up and accordingly by an order dated 13.3.1996, the petitioner was granted the benefit of stepping up w.e.f. 1.2.1986.

3.1 Thereafter, the State Government had floated the scheme for extending the benefit of higher pay scale to the employees serving in the various cadres in State Government and Panchayat Department. The petitioner had completed 9 years service on 20.7.1990 and she had become entitled to get the benefit of First Higher Pay Scale on completion of 9 years service on 20.7.1990. Therefore, petitioner was extended the benefit of First Higher Pay Scale w.e.f. 20.7.1990 by an order dated 1.9.1993. Thereafter, petitioner had completed 20 years service on 20.7.2001. Therefore, as per the scheme floated by the State Government, the petitioner had become entitled to get the benefit of Second Higher Pay Scale w.e.f. 20.7.2001 on completion of 20 years service.

3.2 Thus, the petitioner was required to be extended the benefit of Second Higher Pay Scale w.e.f. 20.7.2001. However, the petitioner was extended the benefit of Second Higher Pay Scale w.e.f. 1.2.2002. Therefore, the petitioner made representations dated 8.12.2008 and 5.2.2009 requesting the respondent No.3 to rectify the mistake while extending the benefit of Second Higher Pay Scale and to extend the benefit of Second Higher Pay Scale w.e.f. 20.7.2001 instead of 1.2.2002. However, the aforesaid representations made by the petitioner went in vain and, therefore, petitioner was constrained to prefer Special Civil Application being No.1179 of 2010 before this Court seeking directions upon the concerned respondent authorities to rectify the error crept up by them in taking into account the date of 1.2.2002 instead of 20.7.2001 while extending the benefit of Second Higher Pay Scale to the petitioner.

3.3 In the aforesaid petition, order came to be passed by this Court on 22.3.2010 whereby the petitioner was permitted to withdraw the said petition with a view t