T R S NAIR Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Gujarat Public Service Commission held competetive examination in April 1963 for recruitment of Stenographers Grade I English appointment to various post in Sachivalaya and allied offices and offices of Heads of Departments situate at Ahmedabad which was the capital of the Gujarat State at the relevant time. Petitioner appeared at the competitive examination and was selected by the Gujarat Public Service Commission for appointment to the post of Stenographer Grade I English (hereinafter referred to as the Stenographer). Petitioner secured fourth rank in the examination and was allotted to Gujarat Revenue Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as the Tribunal). The other selected candidates were allotted to various departments of the Government. Some of them were allotted to various offices of the Sachivalaya. It appears that allotment was made in accordance with exigencies of administration. In other words candidates who were allotted to various Departments of offices in the Sachivalaya did not possess any special merits or were not more meritorious than the candidates allotted to the offices or departments other than Sachivalaya. Petitioners allotment in the Tribunal was purely fortuitous not on the basis of assessment of relative or comparative merits of the selected candidates.

(2.) The State Government by its memorandum dated 7/07/1980 read with Government Resolution Finance Department No. PCR-2279 -200 dated 17/07/1979 granted selection grade of Rs. 900-45- 1080 with effect from 1/07/1979 to 14 Stenographers working in the Sachivalaya. These stenographers included two ##397/25 stenographers who ranked below the petitioner at the examination referred to above. It may be mentioned here that there was a separate seniority list of Stenographers working in Sachivalaya and separate seniority list for stenographers working in non-Sachivalaya departments. Three stenographers working in non-Sachivalaya departments were also granted selection grade of Rs. 900-1280 referred to above with effect from 1/07/1979 as per norms laid down by Government Resolution dated 17/07/1979. Since the petitioner was third in the seniority list of the stenographers working in non-Sachivalaya Departments he was granted selection grade with effect from 1/07/1979 vide Government Order No. SACHM/2182/1(4)/Kh-4 dated Nil May 1982.

(3.) Under Government Resolution Finance Department No. PPA- 1069 (16)-CH dated 5/10/1976 it is laid down that if an employee is drawing pay in the ordinary scale less than the minimum of the selection grade at the time of his appointment in the selection grade his pay should be fixed at the minimum of the selection grade and his next increment would be due after full incremental period of one year is over. Before the petitioner was placed in selection grade he was in the pay-scale of Rs. 650-30-750-35-810-EB-35- 880 and his pay on 1/07/1979 was Rs. 880.00 The normal date of increment for the petitioner was 1st January in the said payscale. In accordance with the aforesaid Government Resolution dated 5/10/1976 petitioner was entitled to fixation of his pay at the minimum of the selection grade that is at Rs 903/- per month and after full incremental period of one year he would have been entitled to Rs. 945.00 with effect from 1/07/1980. As pointed out above petitioners pay was Rs. 880.00 in the ordinary pay-scale on 1/07/1979. Petitioners pay would have been raised to Rs. 920.00 per month with effect from 1/01/1980 had he remained in the ordinary pay-scale. However since the petitioner was placed in the selection grade and since he was entitled to his increment in the selection grade only with effect from 1/07/1980 his pay remained at Rs. 900.00 per month on 1/01/1980. It appears from the table given by the petitioner in paragraph 6 of his petition which is not disputed on behalf of the State Government that the difference in pay on account of postponement of the date of increment as stated above would be reflected throughout the career of the petitioner. For certain periods petitioner would draw pay less than what he would have drawn had he remained in the ordinary pay-scale.