RAJNIKANT JETHALAL THAKKAR Vs. GUJARAT ELECTRICITY BOARD BARODA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) As both these petitions proceed on the same facts and grounds of challenge, the same are taken up for hearing together and are being disposed of by this common order. The facts of the case are taken from the Special Civil Application No.145 of 1998, with reference to which the learned counsel for the petitioner has made detailed arguments.

(2.) The petitioner was appointed as Junior Engineer on 4.9.70 by the respondent, Gujarat Electricity Board. On 29.1.72, the petitioner was promoted to the post of Deputy Engineer and further promotion was made to the post of Executive Engineer in the month of May 1986. It is the case of petitioner that on 8.11.83, he was granted the benefit of pay anomaly for the first time. Benefit of second pay anomaly was granted to the petitioner on 16.7.84. Thereafter the benefit of third and fourth pay anomaly was granted to the petitioner on 26th June 1997 and 18th December 1997 respectively. The Board under its communication dated 12th May 1997 called upon the petitioner to explain as to why the benefit of the fourth pay anomaly given to him should not be withdrawn and his pay should be refixed accordingly. The petitioner submitted a detailed reply to that letter cum show cause notice of the Board and after considering the same, under the order dated 23rd December 1997, it has been ordered for cancellation of the benefits which have been given of the pay anomaly to the petitioner and his pay was refixed as detailed therein. It has further been ordered that if any excess amount is paid to the petitioner, recovery of the same will also be made. Hence this Special Civil Application.

(3.) From the communication cum show cause notice dated 12th May 1997, it transpires that the Board was of the opinion that the benefit of the fourth pay anomaly which has been given to the petitioner as per G.S.O. No.298 and 290 was not in conformity with G.S.O. No.290. The learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the order dated 23rd December 1997 has been passed in violation of principles of natural justice and as such only on this ground, the same may be quashed and set aside. It has next been contended that the benefits which have been given to the petitioner of the pay anomaly are sought to be recalled and recovered after more than ten years and it could have been done only within a reasonable time. Lastly, the learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the order impugned do not contain any reasons. In support of the aforesaid contentions, the learned counsel for the petitioner placed reliance on the following decisions: (i) 1994 LAB I.C. 2493 (SC) -- Bhagwan Shukla v. Union of India. (ii) 1996(2) GLH 623 -- A.R.Pandya v. State of Gujarat & Anr. (iii) 1997(1) LLJ 216 -- E.S.I. Scheme v. Natvarlal Amrutlal Shah. and lastly, decision of this Court, given in Special Civil Application No.7213 of 1997, decided on 19.12.97, in the case of Shambhubhai Manjibhai v. GEB, annexure `F'.