V K KULKARNI Vs. ACCOUNTANT GENERAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Writ Petition has come before us on a reference made by Justice Venkataramiah.

(2.) The petitioner was holding the post of a clerk in the service of the High Court of Judicature at Bombay in the scale of Rs.75-220. Consequent upon the reorganisation of states, the petitioner stood allotted to the new State of Mysore with effect from1-11-56. When the petitioner was serving as a Clerk in the High Court of the new State of Mysore, he was promoted, by selection, to the post of Bench Clerk by the Chief Justice of the High Court of Mysore by Order, dated 17th March, 1958 and given the scale of pay of Rs.150-10-250 that was attached to the post of Bench Clerk. The petitioner made a representation to the Chief Justice for according to him the pay scale of Rs.250-450 on the ground that he will be eligible for that scale of pay, the same being the scale of pay attached to the post one stage above the one held by the petitioner when he was in the service of the High Court of Judicature at Bombay. For this purpose he relied upon the direction of the Government of India issued, under S.117 of the States Reorganisation Act, 1956, which reads as follows:

(3.) According to the petitioner, he could have been promoted if he had remained in the service of the High Court of Judicature at Bombay from the post of clerk to the post of Superintendent carrying the scale of pay of Rs.250-450. As the said scale of pay is advantageous to the petitioner than the scale of pay of Rs. 150-250 attached to the post of Bench Clerk to which the petitioner was promoted, on the basis of the aforesaid direction of the Government of India, the petitioner pressed for his pay being refixed in the scale of Rs.250-450. It is not disputed that the Chief Justice of the High Court of Mysore agreed with the case put- forward by the petitioner and decided on the 27th of September, 1967 to refix the pay of the petitioner in the scale of Rs.250-450. The approval of the Governer, as required by Article 229(2) of the Constitution, was sought. It is also not disputed that approval was accorded to the proposal of the Chief Justice to refix the pay of the petitioner in the scale of Rs.250-450, on the 27th of November 1968. It is also necessary to point out that as refixation of the pay of the petitioner was made with retrospective effect, the State Government also accorded sanction for condonation of delay to enable the petitioner to claim arrears of the difference in the emoluments. After the said approval was communicated to the Chief Justice, he made an order on the 10th of February, 1969 refixing the pay of the petitioner in the scale of Rs.250-450 with effect from the date on which the petitioner was promotel to the post of Bench Clerk in place of the earlier scale of pay fixed i.e., 150-10-250. On the basis of such refixation of the pay of the petitioner he was also paid the difference in emoluments for the period between 1958 to 1962. It is only when for the period subsequent to 1962 claim for emoluments on the basis of refixation of the petitioner's pay was made by presenting the bills, the Accountant General took the objection that the petitioner is not entitled to the scale of pay of Rs.250-450 and returned the bills of the petitioner. The Joint Registrar of the High Court issued a memo, dated 4th of March, 1972 (Exhibit 'A') informing the stand taken by the Accountant General observing that the office of the High Court, in the circumstances, cannot pursue the matter any further. It is in this background that the petitioner has approached this Court for appropriate relief under Article 226 of the Constitution.