UTKAL UNIVERSITY Vs. JYOTIRMAYEE NAYAK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Not satisfied with and aggrieved by the order dated 9.11.1995, passed by the Division Bench of the High Court, this appeal is filed, calling in question the correctness and validity of the directions given to the appellants to pay salary to the respondents as admissible to similarly placed employees of the university, including their arrears.

(2.) The respondents were serving as Library Assistants and Library Attendants in the seminar Library of the Centre for Advanced study in Psychology, Post-graduate Department. Utkal University. They filed writ petitions seeking directions to the appellants to treat them as regular employees and pay them salary on par with the similarly placed employees working in the University on regular basis. The high Court while rejecting the contentions of the respondents for regularisation of their services, gave direction to the appellants to pay salary to the respondents as admissible to similar employees of the University.

(3.) The learned counsel for the appellants pointed out to letters of appointment of the respondents to the effect that their appointments were made on a consolidated salary of rs. 600/- and Rs. 400/- per month, initially and subsequently on the same terms and conditions but increasing the amount to Rs. 1000/- per month. In the absence of any appointment order appointing the respondents on regular pay-scale, the respondents were not entitled to any regular pay scale as was admissible to the similarly placed employees of the University. According to the learned counsel, merely looking to the office order dated 2.12.1994. wherein reference is made to appointment orders but it is said that they shall draw their salary accordingly as per rules, they were not entitled for salary as per regular pay-scale. Learned counsel also pointed out to subsequent order dated 16.1.1995, in which it is stated that the consolidated remuneration of rs. 1000/- per month was to be paid; mere reference to the payment as per rules in the order dated 2.12.1994 cannot be read in isolation