M J BRAHMBHATT Vs. DISTRICT DEVELOPMENT OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Mr.P.H.Pathak, learned advocate for the petitioner and Mr.N.V.Anjaria, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the respondents.

(2.) RULE. Mr.N.V.Anjaria, learned advocate for the respondents waives service of rule on behalf of the respondents. With consent of both the learned advocates for the parties, the present petition is heard finally today.

(3.) The brief facts of the present petition are as under :- The petitioner was employed by the respondent Panchayat as clerk on daily rated basis in the year 1988. On 24th May, 1990, the petitioner holding qualification of SSC and entitled to get the benefits of higher pay scale as per the Government Resolution and settlement. The post of driver available vacant due to transfer of one regular driver Mr.I.S.Desai and therefore, the petitioner was directed to work as a driver. The respondent No.2 issued order on 12th February, 1997 extending the benefits of resolution dated 17th October, 1988 placing the applicant in the scale of Rs.750-940. The petitioner is skilled employee is entitled to get the benefits of resolution applicable to skilled employees and not applicable to the unskilled employees. The petitioner made representation on 28th July, 1997 to the respondents requesting that he being skilled employee and therefore he may be granted the benefits as per the resolution dated 17th October, 1988 as applicable to the skilled employees. The petitioner also pointed out that the petitioner having passed SSC Examination and has completed 7 years services therefore, as per the Government resolution dated 30th October, 1991, he is required to be extended the benefits of time scale of Rs.950 -1500 and even according to the petitioner, the petitioner has not been extended the benefits of TA and DA as well as overtime by the respondents. The petitioner has approached this Court by filing Special Civil Application No. 9381 of 1997 and on that occasion, this court has directed the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for granting him benefits of higher pay scale on the ground that he is discharging duties of Class-III employee and also in view of the Resolution of the Government. The respondents have vide letter dated 24th January, 2000 rejected the request of the petitioner saying that the petitioner has not completed 7 years of services in 1988 and therefore, according to the clarification made by the Government that benefits are to be granted to the employees as and when they complete requisite number of years as it is a policy decision of the Government in favour of daily rated employees. According to the petitioner, the respondents have ignored the clarification made by the Government and also not considered the case on the ground that the petitioner was discharging the duties of Class-III employee. Mr.Pathak, learned advocate has relied upon a decision of the Apex Court reported in 1998 2nd LLJ pg 1191. The prayer in this petition made by the petitioner is to set aside the order of rejecting the claim of the petitioner and to grant him higher pay scale as per the Government Resolution and not considering the case of the petitioner for payment of salary of skilled category of employees and also prayed that the petitioner who has completed 7 years of service as daily rated and since he has passed SSC examination, is entitled to benefit of higher scale and such benefit must be given by the respondents with interest and to direct the respondents to pay all arrears accordingly.