THIRUGNANA SHANMUGAM Vs. STATE OF TAMIL NADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ALREADY the petitioner approached this Court in w. P. No. 1558 of 1978 Dr. N. Thirugana Shanmugham v. State of Tamil Nadu and others because his status as a permanent medical practitioner was disputed by the 1st respondent herein. Ultimately Mr. Justice Padmanabhan quashed the impugned order and allowed the writ petition. Thus, it is no more in dispute that the petitioner is in the permanent employment of Thirumancholai Panchayat Union. The 3rd respondent herein thereafter fixed the petitioner's pay at Rs. 400 per month with effect from 2. 10. 1970 in the pay scale of Rs. 400-15-475-20-575-25-650, which was the lowest pay scale applicable to Siddha Medical Officers of Panchayat Union dispensaries. It so happened that the 3rd respondent in turn sought the approval of the 1st respondent as regards the pay scale fixed by the commissioner payable to the petitioner. The 1st respondent passed the impugned g. O. Ms. No. 1068 dated 28. 6. 1983 declaring that the petitioner's salary has to be revised as under: (a) from 100-5-150 to 325-15-550 with effect from 26. 4. 1973, i. e. the date of G. O. Ms. No. 1063, Health dated 26. 4. 1973 when the post of Medical Officer was made permanent, and (b) Rs. 450-20-590-25-740-30-800 with effect from 1. 4. 1978. On the strength of the said order, the 1st respondent further directed that excess paid to the petitioner under the orders of the 3rd respondent fixing the petitioner's pay at Rs. 400/- should be adjusted according to the pay scale now fixed by the 1st respondent. It may be stated by way of completion of narration of facts that the 1st respondent fixed the above pay scale for the petitioner basing its order on the premises that in a similar case, one man commission had recommended such a scale of pay. It is this order that is sought to be quashed by the petitioner.

(2.) AFTER giving my anxious consideration, I am persuaded to accept the petition. Before I examine the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner, it is convenient to advert to the argument advanced by Mr. Selvaraj, learned Government Advocate, relying upon section 57 (3) of the panchayat Act. I must at once state that the learned Government Advocate has misconceived the purpose and scope of section 57 of the Tamil Nadu Panchayat act, 35 of 1958. On the other hand, the appropriate provision is section 58 of the Panchayats Act. Section 57 relates to establishment of Panchayats and panchayat Union Councils. Under sub-sections (1) and (2), the Panchayat or panchayat Union Council has the power to fix the number, designations and grades of its officers and servants in Panchayat Union Council, while a similar power is vested; in the Inspector in the case of panchayats. Thus, it is clear that at the formation of Panchayat Union Council of Panchayat, the Government or the Inspector as the case may be is vested with the power to alter the number, designations and grades and salaries, fees and allowances payable to the officers and servants notwithstanding the sanction accorded by the panchayat Union Council or Panchayat. The section does not contemplate a case where after the establishment of Panchayat Union Council, a right is vested with the Government to fix the salaries of Officers of Panchayat Union Council. This is amply borne out from a reading of section 58 of the Panchayats Act. It runs thus: "58 (1 ). The Government shall have power to make rules regarding the authorities who may appoint the officers and servants of panchayats and panchayat union councils other than the executive officers and commissioners and the classification, methods of recruitment, pay and allowances, discipline and conduct, and conditions of service of such officers and servants. Such rules may provide for the constitution of any class of officers of servants of panchayat and panchayat union councils other than the executive officers and commissioners into a separate service for the whole or any part of the State. (2) Subject to the provisions of this Act and any rules which the Government may make in this behalf, the panchayat union council may frame regulations in respect of Officers and servants on the staff of panchayat union council (a) fixing the amount and nature of the security to be furnished; (b) prescribing educational and other qualifications; (c) regulating the grant of leave, leave allowances, acting allowances and travelling allowances; (d)regulating the grant of pensions and gratuities; (e) establishing and maintaining provident funds and making contributions thereto compulsory; (f)regulating conduct; and (g) generally prescribing conditions of service; Provided - (i) that the amount of any leave, leave allowances, travelling allowances, pension or gratuity provided for in such regulations shall in no case without the special sanction of the Government exceed what would be admissible in the case of Government servants of similar standing and status; (ii) that the conditions under which such allowances are granted or any leave, superannuation or retirement is sanctioned shall not without similar sanction be more favourable than those for the time being prescribed for such Government Servants. (3) A rule may be made under subsection (1) so as to have retrospective effect on and from a date not earlier than the 2nd October, 1960. " This provision clearly points out that the Government has the power to make the rules. I did ask the learned Government Advocate as to whether any rules were framed at all by the Government pursuant to the power conferred on the Government under section 58 (1) the learned Government Advocate told me that no rules have been framed so far.