DILIP M PATEL Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Learned Advocate Shri B.A.Vaishnav appears on behalf of the petitioner and Learned AGP Shri M.A.Pancholi is appearing on behalf of the respondents.

(2.) By this writ petition, the petitioner has sought for quashing the order dated 29.4.86 passed by the respondent no.2 and to grant the pay scale of Rs.650.00 to Rs.1040.00 given to the degree holder in Mechanical Engineering from the date of his having obtained degree in Mechanical Engineering with arrears of salary and interest 12% p.a. According to the case of the petitioner, the petitioner was appointed through direct selection as an Asst. Lecturer in Mechanical Engineering vide an appointment letter dated 15.2.1983. The petitioner had joined his duties on 24.2.83 pursuant to said appointment letter which is at Annexure A. According to the terms of the appointment order, the petitioner was appointed in the pay scale of Rs.550 to Rs.900/on permanent basis as a direct recruit. Prior to this, the petitioner was working as a Draughtman (Mechanical) in the Government Technical High School, Gheekanta, Ahmedabad. At the time of filing the petition, the petitioner was working as Lecturer in Mechanical, R.C.Technical Institute, Saraspur, Ahmedabad. According to the petitioner, the petitioner had passed the degree examination during the course of employment with the permission of the Department in Mechanical Engineering on 2.3.85 and therefore according to the petitioner he is entitled to be placed in the higher grade of Rs.650 Rs.1040.00 from the above date of passing degree examination in Mechanical Engineering on 2.3.1985. According to the petitioner, he had applied for the grant of this pay scale of Rs.650 - 1040.00 for the first time through an application dated 11.9.1985 and thereafter he also sent a reminder on 7.12.1985. After considering his representation, the authorities were pleased to issue an order dated 1.4.1986 granting such a scale to the petitioner. Thereafter before implementing the said order dated 1.4.1986, the respondent no.2 has cancelled the order vide another office order dated 29th April, 1986. The Office order dated 29.4.86 produced on Page 20 (Annexure E) to the petition wherein it was mentioned that the petitioner was appointed against a post which was meant for certificate course only and therefore the petitioner is not entitled to the pay scale of Rs.650-1040 considering the degree course in Mechanical Engineering. Therefore the earlier order dated 1.4.1986 was cancelled by the respondent no.2. According to the petitioner, the said reason is not correct that he was appointed only for the purpose of certificate course and appointment letter does not stipulate that he was being appointed only for certificate course and therefore he is teaching diploma course since very beginning. Even at the time of filing the present petition, the petitioner had pointed out that the teaching work load of the petitioner consists of subjects which have been narrated in Para 6 of the petition. Therefore according to the petitioner that there is no workload given to the petitioner from certificate course and in fact such course is not being taught in the R.C.Technical Institute since 1985 where the petitioner was working. The petitioner further pointed out that to illustrate one example in respect to one Mr.M.M.Patel who was appointed as Assistant Lecturer in Electrical Engineering for certificate course even though by this order dated 4.11.1982 wherein it was mentioned that Shri Patel was appointed specifically as a Assistant Lecturer in Certificate Course by way of direct recruitment to the post. Therefore the submission of the petitioner is that such terms are not stipulated in his appointment letter dated 15.2.83. The petitioner had made a representation to the department by writing letters dated 11.11.1986, 1.12.1986, 14.7.1987 and subsequently a legal notice by Advocate dated 22.1.1988 but there was no response from the respondents. Therefore the present petition has been filed by the petitioner before this Court. In the said petition Rule has been issued on 1.7.1988 returnable on 14.11.1988 and also notice to interim relief has been issued returnable on 24.7.1988. Thereafter the said petition was fixed for final hearing on 2.4.1991 by order dated 12.3.1991.

(3.) The said petition came up for final hearing before this Court on 16.9.1998. At that time this Court (Coram : Mr.Justice Kundan Singh) has passed an order considering the grievances of the petitioner in respect to the fact that inspite of the fact that the petitioner had made several representations to the authorities concerned against his claims and grievances but the representations made by the petitioner have not been decided by the Authority concerned. Therefore, considering these facts, this Court has directed the petitioner to submit a representation giving complete details alongwith a certified copy of this order dated 16.9.1998 within 2 weeks from that day and after receiving such representation it was directed to respondent no.1 to decide the said representation of the petitioner within a period of four weeks thereafter in accordance with law and it was also directed to list the said matter after six weeks. Direct Service was permitted.