Judicial restraint is essential in financial matters, and claims for pay parity must be substantiated by evidence of discrimination, which the petitioners failed to provide.

ORDER :

(Sanjay Kumar Medhi, J.)

Approach to this writ court has been made by an Association along with two office bearers with the following reliefs:

“In the Premises aforesaid, it is therefore respectfully prayed that Your Lordships may be pleased to admit this Petition, call for the records and issue a Rule calling upon the Respondents to show cause as to why:-

A) a writ of or in the nature of Mandamus shall not be issued directing the Respondents to constitute an Pay Anomaly Committee for a recommendation for enhancement of Grade pay of the Statistical Assistants i.e the petitioners, who are all Graduates with Mathematics, Statistics or Economics, working under the Director of Social Welfare, Assam to Rs. 2800/- from Rs.2500/- w.e.f 1.1.2006 to 31.12.2010 and Rs. 3300/- from Rs. 3000/- w.e.f 1.1.2011. and

B) a writ of like nature shall not be issued directing the Respondents to make a recommendation to enhance the Grade pay of the Statistical Assistants i.e. the petitioners, who are all Graduates with Mathematics, Statistics or Economics, working under the Director of Social Welfare, Assam to Rs. 2800/- from Rs. 2500/-w.e.f 1.1.2006 to 31.12.2010 and Rs 3300/- from Rs. 3000/-w.e.f 1.1.2011 and provide the petitioners with the Grade pay at par with the Science Graduate teachers working in the ME/MEM/MV/Senior Basic Schools.

-AND-

Upon cause/s shown and after hearing the parties and perusing the records, Your Lordships may be pleased to make the Rule absolute and/or to pass such further or other order/s as Your Lordships may deem fit and proper.

-AND-

Pending disposal of the Rule, it shall not be a bar for the Respondents to enhancement of Grade pay of the Statistical Assistants working under the Director Social Welfare, Assam to Rs. 3300/- from Rs. 3000/- w.e.f 1,1.2011 onwards and/or to pass such further or other order/s as Your Lordships may deem fit and proper.”

2. The petitioner no. 1 is the All Assam Social Welfare Statistical Employees Association and it has been averred that members of the petitioner no. 1-Association were appointed as Statistical Assistants in the year 1996 and thereafter. The grievance of the petitioners is with regard to fixation of the Grade Pay.

3. I have heard Shri I Ahmed, learned counsel for the petitioners. I have also heard Shri JK Goswami, learned Addl. Sr. Government Advocate, Assam as well as Shri R Borpujari, learned Standing Counsel, Finance Department, Assam.

4. Shri Ahmed, learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that initially the members of the petitioner no.1-Association was given Grade Pay of Rs. 2,500/-whereas their counterparts in the Education Department working as Statistical Assistants were getting Grade Pay of Rs. 2,800/-. By contending that the duties which were required to be performed by the members of the petitioners Association were more strenuous, including field visits, representation was made for enhancement of the Grade Pay which was accordingly enhanced and made at par at Rs.2,800/-. Subsequently, on the recommendation of the 6th Pay Commission whereas the Grade Pay of Statistical Assistant working in the Education Department was enhanced to Rs. 3,300/-, those of the members of the petitioners Association were enhanced to Rs. 3,000/-.

5. The learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that once the Grade Pay was made at par at Rs. 2,800/-, there was no justification to deny the equal enhancement to Rs. 3,300/-. He has drawn the attention of this Court to Annexure-5 which is an extract of the ROP Rules, 2010 pertaining to the Social Welfare Department to demonstrate that they were getting Grade Pay of Rs. 3,000/-. He has also drawn the attention of this Court to an extract of the report of the Pay Anomaly Committee, 2010, more particularly, recommendation against the Sl. No. 44. He has also submitted that representations were submitted in the year 2011 and 2015 and only thereafter the instant writ petition has been filed.

6. The learned counsel for the petitioners