M.C.PATEL Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present writ petition has been filed seeking a direction for quashing and setting aside orders dated 10.01.1995 and 19.07.2006 passed by the then Area Development Commissioner (at present respondent No.3).

(2.) It is further prayed that the orders dated Nil-11-1993, 23.10.1992 and 30.10.1992 may be restored, by which the petitioners were granted the higher pay scale.

(3.) The short facts of the case are as under: The petitioners were recruited through the Centralized Recruitment Scheme by the Collector, Ahmedabad, in the years 1974, 1978 and 1976 as Typist and Junior Clerk respectively and they had continued to serve as such. Subsequently, they were promoted to the post of Senior Clerk and, on completion of period of nine years, the petitioner Nos. 1, 2 and 4 were given the higher pay-scale with effect from 1st July, 1987and petitioner No.3 with effect from 1st October 1987 by an order dated 23rd October 1992. By the aforesaid order, the petitioners were placed in the higher pay-scale of Rs.1200- 2040 in the cadre of Senior Clerk from the pay-scale of Rs.950-20- 1150. The aforesaid order was passed in view of Government Resolutions dated 5th July 1991 and 11th October 1991 respectively. As revealed in the Government Resolution dated 16th August 1994, the policy of grant of higher pay-scale came to be revised and grant of such pay-scale was subject to various conditions, as enumerated in the said Government Resolution more particularly clause 3, sub-clauses 5 and 9 of the said resolution, which required that, if an employee passes out departmental examination for the purpose of promotion after completion of nine years of service in the same cadre, higher payscale is to be given from the date of passing of such examination. In view of the aforesaid Government Resolution, the impugned order dated 10th January 1995 came to be passed, by which, the petitioners have been placed in the lower pay-scale of Rs.950-1150 from the higher pay-scale of Rs.1200-1560-2040, without giving any opportunity of hearing to the petitioners, on the premise that the department examination was passed by the petitioners in the year 1992 only and, accordingly, their pay-scale was fixed.