The central legal point established is that the duties and responsibilities of the promoted posts determine the entitlement to higher pay scale, as per relevant rules.

JUDGMENT :

Sanjaya Kumar Mishra, J.

1. Common questions of facts and law are involved in both the writ petitions, therefore, with the consent of learned counsel for the parties, both the petitions are heard together and disposed of by this common judgment.

2. Petitioners, in Writ Petition (SB) No. 447 of 2014, who are working as Professor in the Sushila Tiwari Medical College, have prayed for the following reliefs:

“i. Declare denial of salary for the promoted post of Professor to the petitioners even after taking work of a higher post from them, as arbitrary and illegal.

ii. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondent no. 1 to pay salary for the post of Professor to the petitioners in Pay Band – 4 Rs. 37400 - 67000/- with Grade Pay Rs. 8900/- from the date of their joining on the promoted post and to continue to pay salary in Pay Band – 4 to the petitioners till they discharge duties of the post of Professor.

iii. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to release the entire arrears / difference of salary from the date of joining of the petitioners on the post of Professor with a further direction upon respondent no. 1 to pay interest on the delayed payment of the said amount.”

3. Similar prayer is made by the petitioners in Writ Petition No. 448 of 2014 but they are demanding pay for the post of Associate Professor in Pay Band – 4 with grade pay Rs. 8700.

4. This is brought to our notice that the question - whether petitioners shall get higher pay scale, when they are being promoted in officiating capacity to the post of Professor (in WPSB No. 447 of 2014) and Associate Professsor in (WPSB No. 448 of 2014), is no more res integra. The coordinate Bench of this Court in Writ Petition (SB) No. 443 of 2012 has examined this question and has given a categorical finding vide judgment dated 03.03.2014. We find it appropriate to quote the words used by the Coordinate Bench of this Court:

“5. A careful perusal of the record shows that all the petitioners were having all eligibility criterion under the qualification to be promoted to the post of Associate Professor. While making such promotion, it was nowhere a condition or that they were forewarned that such promotions are temporary or only officiating in nature. On the other hand, the minutes of the meeting dated 20.10.2010, on which the petitioners are relying heavily clearly shows that, inter alia, the promotion to the post of Associate Professor is a post which carries pay scale of Rs.14300-18400. In such circumstances, once this was done, there was no reason for the respondents to deny such salary to the petitioners, even if it is presumed for the sake of argument that their promotion is only temporary.

6. Learned Chief Standing Counsel who appears in this matter on behalf of the respondents and has also filed a detailed counter affidavit in this case, on the other hand, urges this Court that it was clearly spelt out in the promotion order that their promotion is purely officiating and temporary and they shall not be given any service benefit merely because of this condition.

7. Learned counsel for the petitioners placed reliance on Rule 30 of the Financial Hand Book, which reads as under:-

“30. Pay of officiating Government servants:

(1) Subject to the provisions of Chapter VI, a Government servant who is appointed to officiate in a post shall not draw pay higher than his substantive pay in respect of a permanent post, other than a tenure post, unless the post in which the appointment is made in an officiating capacity belongs to a Selection Grade of a service, or, unless the officiating appointment involves the assumption of duties and responsibilities of greater importance than those attaching to the post, on which he holds a lien or would hold a lien had his lien not been suspended:

Provided that the Government, subject to such conditions as they may prescribe, may exempt from the operation of this Rul