DIRECTOR OF LANGUAGES Vs. RASIKLAL A NAYAK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Mr.Neeraj Soni, learned Assistant Government Pleader for the petitioner authorities. Challenge in this petition is made to the order of the Gujarat Civil Services Tribunal dated 01.06.2007 passed in Appeal No. 254 of 2004, whereby the action of the authorities of ordering recovery of Rs.34205/ - from the respondent was quashed and set aside. The respondent has retired in November, 2001.

(2.) THE controversy before the Tribunal was in the following factual background. The respondent was working as Superintendent Class -III in the office of the Director of Languages. He was promoted to the post of Editor Class -II on 25.07.1996. The pay scale of the promotional post was Rs.2000 -3500. Pay fixation as per Rules was made by the authorities. The pay of the petitioner was fixed at the stage of Rs.2900/ -. Subsequently, general revision of pay of all the employees came in effect in the year 1998. It was effective retrospectively. The effective date was 01.01.1996. From record, it transpires that the pay scale of the post from which the respondent was promoted and the pay scale of the post to which the respondent was promoted, both became identical. As per the clarification of the Government, no pay fixation was to be done under these circumstances, and therefore, the difference of one increment or so, resulted in over payment to the respondent - is the logic put forward by the authorities. At the time of retirement of the respondent, the question of this recovery cropped up, which was challenged before the Tribunal, which is set aside by it. It is this order which is under challenge in this petition.

(3.) HAVING heard learned A.G.P. for the petitioner and having gone through the record, this Court finds that the judgment of the Tribunal impugned in this petition is legal and valid and this petition needs to be rejected on more than one grounds. Firstly, the promotion of the respondent was in the year 1996 and the pay fixation was made at the relevant time, as per the pay scales and Rules prevailing then. Because of the revision of pay scales in the year 1998, this question cropped up. In this fact situation Rule 57 -A of the Bombay Civil Services Rules, 1959 will apply with full force. Tribunal has taken note of this Rule and has interfered. In my view, the view taken by the Tribunal is legal and valid and no interference is warranted.