SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1957 Supreme(All) 224

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
G. Mehrotra, J.
LACHMAN PRASAD RAM PRASAD - Appellant
Versus
SUPERINTENDENT, GOVERNMENT HARNESS AND SADDLERY FACTORY, KANPUR - Respondents
Civil Misc. Writ 1990 Of 1956
Decided On : 09/06/1957

Advocates Appeared:
K.K.BAJPAI, S.N.Dwivedi, S.S.DHAVAN

The rules framed under Section 241 of the Government of India Act, 1935, did not specify the procedure for refixation of pay of existing employees in accordance with the unified scale. It only gave an option to employees to choose between the unified scale and their existing scale.

Headnote:

CIVIL SERVICE - FIXATION OF PAY - RULES FRAMED BY GOVERNOR GENERAL UNDER SECTION 241 OF GOVERNMENT OF INDIA ACT, 1935 - INTERPRETATION - OPTION TO BE GOVERNED BY UNIFIED SCALE - FIXATION OF PAY WITH EFFECT FROM 1-1-1947 - PROMOTIONS OR REVERSIONS IN EXISTING SCALE - WHETHER TO BE REGARDED AS PROMOTIONS OR DEMOTIONS WITH REFERENCE TO SCALE OF PAY ATTACHED TO THEM - UNIFORM POLICY ADOPTED BY GOVERNMENT REGARDING PROMOTIONS AND DEMOTIONS - WRIT OF MANDAMUS - WHETHER ISSUABLE.

Fact of the Case:

Petitioners, employees of Harness and Saddlery Factory, Kanpur, were promoted to various grades during 1941-42. After the war, they were all placed as 'A' grade clerks. In 1947, the Pay Commission recommended unification of some grades and fixation of new pay scales. Petitioners opted for the new scale with effect from 1-1-1947. In 1948, respondent fixed their pay accordingly. However, in 1952, respondent was directed to refix their pay taking into account promotions and demotions during 1-4-1947 to 1-1-1948. Petitioners challenged this refixation, arguing that it was not done in accordance with the rules framed by the Governor General.

Finding of the Court:

The court held that the rules framed under Section 241 of the Government of India Act, 1935, did not specify the procedure for refixation of pay of existing employees in accordance with the unified scale. It only gave an option to employees to choose between the unified scale and their existing scale. The court also noted that the government had adopted a uniform policy regarding promotions and demotions.

Issues: 1. Whether the fixation of pay was done in accordance with the rules framed by the Governor General in 1947 and amended in 1949? 2. Whether the refixation of pay taking into account promotions and demotions during 1-4-1947 to 1-1-1948 was justified?

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the rules framed under Section 241 of the Government of India Act, 1935, did not specify the procedure for refixation of pay of existing employees in accordance with the unified scale. It only gave an option to employees to choose between the unified scale and their existing scale. The court also noted that the government had adopted a uniform policy regarding promotions and demotions. Therefore, the court held that the refixation of pay taking into account promotions and demotions during 1-4-1947 to 1-1-1948 was not contrary to the rules.

Final Decision: The petition was dismissed, but the parties were directed to bear their own costs.

G. MEHROTRA, J.

( 1 ) THIS is a petition on behalf of 15 employees of the Harness and Saddlery Factory Kanpur, under Article 226 of the Constitution for the following reliefs:

(i) to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction commanding the respondent to give effect to his order dated 27-12-1948. (ii) to issue an appropriate order or direction commanding the respondent to refrain from giving effect to his order dated 1-3-1956. (iii) to issue an appropriate order or direction to the respondent to refrain from making any deductions from the pay of the petitioners either on account of the order dated 1-3-1956 or on the order of the Controller of Defence Accounts dated 10-7-1956. It should, however, be pointed out that since the filing of this writ petition the respondent has not deducted anything from the pay of the petitioners and consequently the third relief referred to above, is not pressed.

( 2 ) BRIEFLY the facts are that the petitioners were employed in the Harness and Saddlery Factory kanpur on various dates during the years 1939-40. They were employed on daily rate of wages. On various dates in 1941 they were promoted to b grade clerks. In the year 1942, they were then promoted to a grade clerks and some of them were subsequently promoted to Supervisor grade. After the termination of the war, however, they were all placed as a grade clerks. The division of clerks before the implementation of the Pay Commission Report by the Central Govt. was divided into following grades:


(1) Senior temporary clerks grade (i) Rs. 170-10-240 (2) Senior temporary clerks grade (ii) Rs. 80-7 1/2-140-10-160. (3) Clerks a grade Rs. 60-3-75 (4) Clerks b grade Rs. 36-2-60-65. In December, 1947 the report of the Pay Commission was published and the report recommended unification of some of the aforesaid grades and for fixation of the new scale of pay for the unified scale. After the publication of the report of the Pay Commission the Governor general made certain rules in exercise of his powers under Section 241 (2) of the Government of india Act, 1935. These rules were called as Civilian in Defence Service (Revision of Pay) Rules 1947, and were published in the Gazette of India dated 31-12-1947. Under this rule different grades of the Clerks mentioned above were abolished and an option was given to the clerks to opt for the new scale of pay which was to be effective from January, 1947.

( 3 ) BY a letter dated 10th December issue by the Controller, Army Factory Accounts Misc. Section Calcutta, the petitioners were given the benefit of 1947 rules. In accordance with the instructions issued in this letter the respondent fixed the pay of the petitioners by his order dated 27-12-1948. On 7-9-1949 in exercise of the powers conferred by Section 242 (2) Government of india Act, certain amendments were made in the Schedule of the Civilian in Defence Service (Revision of Pay) Rules, 1947. On 26-2-1952, the Controller Army Factory Accounts, Calcutta sent a letter to the respondent saying that the fixation of pay of the petitioners in accordance with the letter dated 10-12-1948, was wrongly done and should be corrected. The petitioners made certain representations against the letter dated 26-2-1952 and they were informed that pending their representations, no effect should be given to the directions contained in the letter dated 26-2-1952. By a letter dated 28-12-1953, however, the Controller defence Accounts Calcutta informed the respondent that the directions contained in the letter dated 26-2-1952 would remain undisturbed and also issued some directions for the refixation of pay at an early date and recovery of over-drawn amount was to be made from the pay with effect from January, 1952. A representation was then made against this letter, and on 25-4-1956, the petitioners were informed that no change would be made in the decision taken on the letter referred to earlier. Meanwhile on 1-3-1956, the pay was refixed. On 10-7-1956, the Controller Defence Acc

























Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top