Different pay scales for the same post are legally permissible if based on educational qualifications, provided there exists an intelligible differentia with a rational nexus to the objective of the classification. Such expert-devised pay structures are generally upheld by courts unless they are proven arbitrary or unreasonable.

JUDGMENT :

N. UNNI KRISHNAN NAIR, J.

1. Heard Mr. R. Chakraborty, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. B. Gogoi, learned Addl. AG, Assam along with Mr. M. Bhuyan, learned standing counsel, Health & Family Welfare (H&FW) Department, Assam appearing for the respondent Nos. 1, 2, 3 & 5, Mr. R.K. Talukdar, learned standing counsel, AG(A&E) Assam and Mr. A. Bhattacharyya, learned counsel appearing for the respondent No. 6.

2. The petitioners in the present writ petition have prayed for a direction upon the respondent authorities for enhancement of their grade pay to Rs. 3300/- (Three Thousand Three Hundred) by maintaining parity with the grade pay authorized to the respondent No. 6, who is also working in a post similar to one held by the petitioners, herein, in Jorhat Medical College & Hospital, Jorhat.

3. The facts in brief, requisite for adjudication of the issues arising in the present writ petition is noticed as under:-

The Principal-cum-Chief Superintendent of the Jorhat Medical College & Hospital, had issued an advertisement dated 12-04-2010 for recruitment, amongst others, against the post of Modeler-4 in the Anatomy Department, having creation No. 120. 05 (five) posts of Modeler-4, was put up for recruitment vide the said advertisement. The said advertisement mandated a candidate desirous for recruitment as Modeler-4, to have a qualification of HSSLC pass with Diploma in preparation of medical/ embryology models from a recognized Medical Institute or experience of preparation of medical models for a Medical College or Diploma or Degree in Fine Arts from a Government Institution, with 02 years experience in Sculpture or preparation of models in plastic, POP and fibre glass etc. The petitioners along with the respondent No. 6 submitted their respective applications and their applications having been found to be satisfy the eligibility criteria set out in the said advertisement, they are allowed to participate in the selection process. The petitioners along with respondent No. 6, on merits were placed in the select list for appointment against the post of Modeler-4, as advertised vide the advertisement dated 12-04-2010. On their such selection, the petitioners along with respondent No. 6, were appointed vide issuance of individual orders of appointment, all dated 01-12-2010. The petitioners as well as the respondent No. 6, were on their such appointments authorized a scale of pay of Rs. 3010/- to Rs. 6075/-, (pre-revised scale). It is projected that while the petitioners do not have a degree qualification in Fine Arts, the respondent No. 6 was a holder of a degree in Fine Arts. Thereafter, on the implementation of the Revision of Pay (RoP) Rules. 2010, the petitioners were authorized their pay in pay band- 2 with a grade pay of Rs. 2100/- (Rupees Two Thousand One Hundred). However, following the prescription made in this connection by the Pay Commission, the respondent No. 6, while being authorized his pay in pay band-2 was authorized a grade pay of Rs. 2500/- (Rupees Two Thousand Five Hundred). Subsequently, the grade pay of Rs. 2100/- as authorized to the petitioners in pursuance to the acceptance of the recommendations of the Anomaly Committee was enhanced to Rs. 2400/-. The grade pay authorized to the respondent No. 6 was enhanced to Rs. 3000/- (Rupees Three Thousand). The petitioners had approached the respondent authorities praying for maintaining parity of pay with that of the respondent No. 6, who was also appointed as Modeler-4, in pursuance to the same recruitment process from, wherein, the petitioner