K R MALHOTRA Vs. DELHI VIDHYUT BOARD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Petitioner was initially appointed as a Junior Clerk in the Respondents/DVB. , He is presently in Class-I service as a Private Secretary. His contention is that in conformity with the Report of the DESU wage Revision Committee (also known as Justice J.D. Jain Committee), once a promotee officer (such as the Petitioner) enters into Class-1 service in his own right or in the time bound promotional scale, he. should be dealt at par with the direct recruits in that grade for the purposes of all benefits of next promotional scale. It is his grievance that this recommendation is not being implemented by the Respondents.

(2.) Mr. V.K. Shall, learned counsel appearing for the Respondents has submitted that a perusal of the Office Order dated 23/7/1997 would make it evident that the recommendations of the Jain Committee were not accepted in toto. The relevant Office Order is reads as follows:

(3.) Mr. Shali's contention is that the legal propriety of this Office Order has not even been assailed in the present writ petition. He argues that the Office Order extracted above is salutary inasmuch as direct recruits comprise and intelligent differential and are in a separate compartment from promotees. Promotees have already availed the benefits of several promotions; in the case of the Petitioner he has been promoted thrice already. It was, therefore, correctly and justifiably considered by the Respondents 'that only direct recruits should be given time bound promotions to ward off the deleterious effects of stagnation.