1. Heard Mr. B. Kalita, learned senior counsel assisted by Mr. A. Khanikar, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Mr. 1. Ahmed, learned counsel appearing for the respondent Nos.1 and 2. I have also heard Ms. R. Chakraborty, learned Addl. senior Government advocate, Assam appearing for the respondent No.4.

2. By means of this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for a direction to the respondents to provide him with the pay scale of Upper Division Assistant (UDA) of Heads of Department establishment as prescribed under various ROP Rules framed by the Government of Assam. Another prayer made in the writ petition is that he should be allowed to continue in service till the age of superannuation, i.e., 60 years and all other retirement benefits like CPF, leave encashment and gratuity, etc.

3. The petitioner was an employee of the Government of Arunachal Pradesh in the Public Works Department. He had been serving under the State Government as LDA till 30.6.1987 when he took voluntary retirement.

4. In response to the Annexure B employment notice dated 16.7.1988 issued by the Director, Assam Minorities Development Board (Respondent No.1) for the post of UDA in the time scale of Rs. 675-1100, the petitioner responded to the same by offering his candidature. Be it stated here that in the advertisement, there was no prescription of upper age limit and even the retired employees who retired during last 3 years could also apply.

5. The petitioner was appointed pursuant to the aforesaid advertisement. Such appointment was in the year 1988. However, the copy of the appointment order has not been annexed to the writ petition. With such appointment in the Board, the petitioner continued in his services. He retired from service on attaining the age of superannuation prescribed by the Board, i.e., 58 years on 28.2.2002. To that effect, the letter dated 28.2.2002 (Annexure K) was addressed to the petitioner by the Director of the respondent-Board. After such retirement, the petitioner filed the writ petition on 20.6.2003, claiming continuation in service up to the age of 60 years and also the scale of pay as admissible to the UDAs of Heads of Departments establishment. He has also claimed retirement benefits of CPF, leave encashment and gratuity, etc.

6. According to the petitioner, the respondent-Board being an authority within the meaning of article 12 of the Constitution of India and being under deep and pervasive control of the State Government, is entitled to all such service benefits, as are admissible to State Government employees.

7. In paragraph 4 of the writ petition, the petitioner has stated that the respondent-Board is a Society registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1860 and that it is entirely financed and controlled by the State Government. In paragraph 5 of the writ petition, the petitioner has indicated the pay scales of LDA and UDA as admissible to the State Government employees. It is the stand of the petitioner that while the LDAs working in the Board have been extended with the pay scale of the Heads of Departments establishment, the petitioner working in the post of UDA has been denied the scale of UDAs of Heads of Departments establishment. In this connection, the petitioner has referred to the Annexures H and J letters dated 28.9.1992 and 22.11.1999, addressed to the Government of Assam in the Political Department and Welfare of Minorities Department respectively by the Director of respondent Board. In the said two letters, it was stated that while the LDA working in the Board had been sanctioned the scale of pay applicable to Heads of Departments establishment, the UDAs had been provided with the scale of pay applicable to District and Subordinate establishment level.

8. The respondents have filed their counter affidavit denying the claim of the petitioner. It has been stated that the respondent-Board is a registered society and there are no permanent Officers in the Board. All the Officers are deputed b

Click Here to Read the rest of this document