N JAGANATHAN M B B S Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) WRIT petition W. P. No. 20061 of 2001 is filed by the petitioner challenging the impugned order of the second respondent dated 1. 10. 2001 directing the Executives of the Cooperative and Public Sector Sugar mills to fix the scale of pay for Medical Officers who are drawing their pay in the pre-revised scale of pay of Rs. 3700-125-4700-150-5000 in the revised scale of pay of Rs. 10000-325-15200. The case of the petitioner is that he has joined in Ambur Sugar Mills as Medical Officer on 17. 1. 1977. On 4. 11. 1987, he got transferred to Tirupattur Co-operative Sugar Mills. In the year 1992, the second respondent considered the service conditions of the Medical Officers working in various Co-operative Sugar Mills and Public Sector Sugar Mills and at that time, the second respondent was competent to frame or modify the service conditions of all common cadre officers. The medical officers also belonged to the common cadre. After examination of the representation, the second respondent has granted Selection Grade and Special Grade scales of pay to such of those medical Officers who had completed 10 and 20 years of service respectively. Accordingly, the Medical Officers working in the various sugar mills at that-time were placed in Special Grade scales of pay and the said scales of pay were given effect to vide the proceedings of the second respondent in r. C. No. 123 71/91 G 1 -dated 4. 5. 1992.

(2.) IT is the case of the petitioner that even though he has been working as a Medical Officer from 1977, he got the benefit for the first time only in the year 1992, as stated above. The petitioner states that he completed 20 years of service as a Medical Officer on 17. 1. 1997 and Special grade was fixed and he was drawing the scale of pay for a Special Grade Officer since 17. 1. 1997. The petitioner also states that the pay scale of all sugar mills officers were revised pursuant to G. O. Ms. No. 302 dated 25. 8. 2000 passed by the first respondent and the second respondent has implemented the same in respect of the Medical Officers in his proceedings dated 19. 10. 2000. The case of the petitioner is that while implementing the revised pay scales, the second respondent has wholly ignored the pay scale of Rs. 3700-5000, which was the scale of pay of the petitioner at that time. In Annexure-1 of the proceedings dated 19. 10. 2000, after providing for the revised scale The Madras Law Journal- Reports for the existing scale of pay of Rs. 4500-15-5700, the next cadre was straight away fix with the scale of pay of Rs. 3000-4500 and scale of pay of rs. 3700-5000 was deliberate left out, which was the Special Grade for Medical officer pay scale. According to the petitioner, by leaving out the said pay scale, petitioner, viz. , Dr. N. Jaganathan and another petitioner dr. V. Dayasagar alone are affected. The petitioner has made a representation the second respondent and the second respondent has passed the impugned order dated 1. 10. 2000, rejecting the petitioner's request affirming the scale of pay fixed vide the circular dated 19. 10. 2000.

(3.) IT is the case of the learned counsel for the petitioners that a right has been conferred by the service conditions on the petitioners in both the writ as early as on 4. 5. 1992 by the second respondent himself-by giving Selection Grade scale and Special Grade scale, out of which the Selection Grade was conferred after completion of 10 years of service in the pay scale of Rs. 3000-100-3500-125-4500 and Special Grade was conferred after completion of 20 years of service in the scale of pay of rs. 3700-125-4700-150-5000. Learned counsel would further contend that inasmuch as only two petitioners who are affected in the whole of the State, it has to be treated as an anomalous situation and their claim of equated pay of rs. 3700-125-4700-150-5000, which is now equivalent to Rs. 12000-375-16500, should be granted to the petitioners. Further, the fifth pay commission confers with the fitment benefit, to which the petitioners are entitled and there is no reason to revise it to Rs. 10000-325-15200, which has no basis whatsoever. IT is also the contention that denying the Selection Grade pay to the petitioners is arbitrary and the petitioners are entitled for pay protection. The learned counsel relied upon a hierarchy of judgments to show the application of the principle of equal pay for equal work and also show that benefits already conferred cannot be withdrawn without proper reasons, especially in the circumstances where civil consequences have already occurred. The learned counsel also relied upon the judgment of the Calcutta High Court rendered in braithwaite Officers'Association v. Union of India and others, 2003 Lab. L. C. 213 (Calcutta High Court) to show that the policy decision can be examined to the extent whether it had suffered from non-application of mind and arbitrariness and the same is subject to judicial review.