IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
KALYAN RAI SURANA, J.
Girin Chandra Das S/o. Sri Deben Chandra Das – Appellant
Versus
The State Of Assam And 4 Ors.
WP(C) 4835 of 2018
Decided on : 28-07-2022
Constitution of India, 1950 - Article 16 (4A), 226, 335 - Assam Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Reservation of Vacancies in services and posts) Act, 1978 - Restore Order - Set aside order - Issue writ of Mandamus - Refund recovered amount - Equalization of pay – Power of High court to issue writs - Petitioner is that he belongs to Scheduled Tribes (Plain) community - He was temporarily appointed as Work Charged Mohorrir under Mangaldoi Public Health Engineering Division vide order, issued by Executive Engineer (PHE), and his service was extended from time to time - Principle relating to fixation of seniority of reserved candidates vis-a-vis general candidates in promoted posts. (Para 16).
Findings of the Court :
Court finds force in submissions made by learned standing counsel for Revenue Department that from materials available on record, petitioner has not been able to demonstrate that pay disparity, if any, between petitioner and said was attributed directly due to fixation of pay under FR-22 (I)(a)(1) or any other provision of FR and SR - Claim of petitioner for equalization/stepping-up of pay is in consonance with OM, issued by Govt. of Assam, Finance (Establishment-A) Department.
Result: Writ petition allowed.
JUDGMENT :
Heard Mr. S. Chauhan, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. R. Borpujari, learned standing counsel for the Finance Department, representing respondent nos.1 and 5. Also heard Mr. R. Bora, learned counsel appearing on behalf of Mr. P.N. Goswami, learned Standing counsel for the Public Health Engineering Department, representing respondent nos.2 to 4.
2. By filing this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has claimed for the following reliefs:
(ii) Set aside the order dt. PHED-227/98/41 dt. 23/11/2007 passed by the Finance Department.
(iii) Set aside the order No.PHE-209/Estt./98 dt. 31/05/2013 passed by the Chief Engineer (PHE), Hengrabari.
(iv) Set aside the Office Order No.54 dt. 18/01/2014 passed by the Additional Chief Engineer (PHE), Barak Valley Zone.
(v) Set aside the order no. 55 dt. 18/01/2014 passed by the Additional Chief Engineer (PHE), Barak Valley Zone, Silchar;
(vi) Set aside the order no. 57 dt. 24/02/2014 passed by the Additional Chief Engineer (PHE), Barak Valley Zone, Silchar; and also issue writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to refund the recovered amount Rs.6,27,082/- and give the benefit of equalization of pay to the petitioner as given to Smt. Lily Hrangkhal by virtue of judgment dated 20/04/2015 passed in W.P.(C) No. 597/2008 and by order dt. 25/07/2017 of Finance Department, order dt. 03/08/2017 by the PHE Department and/or pass such other order(s) as Your Lordships may deem fit and proper.”
3. The case of the petitioner is that he belongs to Scheduled Caste community. By an order dated 10.06.1981, issued by the Executive Engineer (PHE), Sibsagar Division, the petitioner was temporarily appointed as Work-charged Sectional Assistant under S.D.O. Public Health Engineering (PHE for short), Sonari, and that his service was extended from time to time. Thereafter, by an order dated 04.07.1996, issued by the Additional Chief Engineer, PHE, Assam, the petitioner was appointed as Lower Division Assistant (LDA for short) on regular basis and posted in the office of the Addl. Chief Engineer, PHE, Barak Valley & Hills Zone, Haflong. Thereafter, on promotion, the petitioner had joined the post of Upper Division Assistant in the office of the Additional Chief Engineer, PHE, Hills & Barak Valley Zone, Haflong, where he joined on 07.10.1996.
4. It is projected by the petitioner that one Jiban Chandra Nath, who was general category candidate, was appointed as a Typist in the establishment of the PHE Department. However, in the year 1981, the post of Typist and the post of LDA were amalgamated and re-designated as Typist-cum-LDA, and on 30.03.1998, he was promoted from the post of LDA to the post of UDA. Likewise, one Smt. Lily Hrangkhal, who belonged to Scheduled Tribes (Hills), was promoted to the post of UDA on 05.09.1991. Thus, as the petitioner had joined as UDA on 07.10.1996 on promotion, the petitioner was junior to Smt. Lily Hrangkhal, but senior to the said Jiban Chandra Nath, who was drawing higher scale of pay due to long service in the feeder post of Typist-cum-LDA and as on 01.03.1998, after considering increments, his salary was fixed at Rs.6,075/-.
5. It is projected that by virtue of 77th amendment to the Constitution of India, the Government was empowered to make provisions for reservation in promotion vide Article 16 (4A). Thereafter, by 82nd amendment to the Constitution of India, Article 335 was amended. Thereafter, by 85th amendment to the Constitution of India, Article 16(4A) was amended. Accordingly, the Government was empowered to make provisions for reservation in matters of promotion, with consequential seniority.
6. Subsequently, by an order no. PHE-209/Esst/98/1017 dated 09.04.1999, the pay of Smt. Lily Hrangkhol, Girin Chandra Das (pe
Union of India v. Virpal Singh Chauhan reported in (1995) 6 SCC 684
Point of Law : Article 16(4)(A) enables State to make provision for reservation with consequential seniority.
Point of Law : Article 16(4)(A) enables State to make provision for reservation with consequential seniority.
The principle that a senior employee cannot receive less pay than a junior is upheld, prompting the court to direct equal pay adjustments based on established seniority and promotion timelines.
A government employee senior in service must not receive lesser pay than a junior in the same cadre, and the absence of justifiable reasons for pay disparity constitutes a violation of constitutional....
While Implementing scheme, difference in pay scales on account of grant of financial upgradation under old ACP Scheme (15.12.1998) under this scheme within same cadre shall not be construed as an ano....
Merger of Section Officer and AAO pay scales w.e.f. 01.01.2006 entitles seniors promoted pre-date to minimum of merged scale for 6th CPC fixation at Rs.13,950 + GP 4800, overriding prior pay differen....
Senior entitled to pay stepping up under FR 22 to match junior in same cadre despite different entry; refixation without hearing violates natural justice.
The principle of equal pay for equal work does not entitle employees to claim parity in pay scales if their recruitment processes differ significantly.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.