1

S/8

S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION No.1536/2008

[RAJASTHAN FOREST RANGE OFFICERS ASSOCIATION VS.

THE STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.]

Dated :

05.03.2008

HON'BLE MR. MUNISHWAR NATH BHANDARI, J.

Mrs.Nupur Bhati for the petitioner.

*****

By this writ petition the petitioner seeks direction to provide the pay

scale to the post of Ranger Gr.-I at par with the pay scale of the post of

Inspector in Police Department with all consequential benefits and in that

regard a challenge has also been made to the order dated 15.01.2008 by

which the aforesaid prayer of the petitioner was turned down by the

respondents.

The facts relevant to the present matter are that the petitioners is an

association representing Ranger Gr.-I of the Forest Department. It is

contended that post of Ranger Gr.-I falls under the Forest Subordinate

Service Rules. Pursuant to the recommendation of the IVth Pay

Commission, Ranger Gr.-I were given pay scale of 1640-2040 which now

is the pay scale of 5,500-9000 in view of the recommendation of the Vth

Pay Commission. The grievance of the petitioner is that the post of Ranger

Gr.I should have been given pay scale of 2000-3200 on the

recommendation of the IVth Pay Commission and consequent pay scale of

6500-10500 on the recommendation of the Vth Pay Commission. The

2

ground to seek such benefit is that post of Ranger Gr.I in the Forest

Department is having equivalence to he post of Inspector in the Police

Department, therefore, anomaly in the pay scale so exist by giving different

pay scale to Ranger Gr.-I in Forest Department and a Police Inspector in

Police Department is arbitrary being violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the

Constitution of India. It is further contended that even matter of grant of

higher pay scale to Ranger Gr.I was recommended for removal of disparity

by the Department itself. Even Pandey Committee made recommendation

so as the Minister for Environment and Forest but none of the

recommendation were then accepted by the State Government of Rajasthan

rather the prayer made by the petitioner to claim parity was then turned

down vide the impugned order dated 15.01.2008, whereas few State

Government excepted the recommendations of Pandey Committee.

According to the petitioner the impugned order dated 15.01.2008 does not

take care of the fact that the two post i.e. the post of Ranger Gr.I and post of

Police Inspector are having same educational qualification as well as

duties, therefore, even on the ground of equal pay for equal work, the same

pay was required to be given but then blindly applying the recommendation

of IVth Pay Commission, Ranger Gr.-I has been given lesser pay scale than

the Police Inspector. In that regard reference of Annex.1 has been given

where comparison has been made by the Forest Department to show the

equivalence of the posts in two department and same way even my

attention was drawn regarding the recommendations made by the Forest

3

Department in favour of the petitioner.

I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for

the petitioner and perused the document referred to support her contention.

Perusal of Annex.1 shows that exercise undertaken therein is nothing but

showing status of the post in two department without showing equivlalence

of duties, qualification, mode of recruitment and responsibilities, etc. thus

comparison has been made only by arranging different post of different

department from higher to lower post.

So far as recommendation of Pandey Committee is concerned, pay

scale of 2000 – 3200 is recommended on the ground that said pay scale has

been given for the post of Inspector in Police department and Tehsildar in

revenue department and mainly on that basis, said pay scale was

recommended for the post of Ranger Grade I apart from this, showing

duties of Ranger I to be hard. Firstly recommendation of the Committee

cannot be enforced by a Court. Second