J KUMARAGURU Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ALL the petitioners joined the services of the respondents 1 and 2 as Livestock Assistants Grade-II on various dates between 1967 and 1980 and as per the III Pay Commission, their pay scale was Rs. 260-430. The next avenue of promotion for them is Livestock Assistants Grade-I in the pay scale of Rs. 330-560. The Livestock Assistants' Association of Pondicherry was representing to the Government that their counter-parts in other Union Territories were drawing the pay scale of Rs. 330-560 and demanded to implement the same pay scale for them also. It seems, pursuant to the said representation of the Livestock Assistants Association of Pondicherry, a meeting was held between the Livestock Assistants' Association and the Secretary to the Government of Pondicherry, Local Administration Department on 17. 5. 1981 and pursuant to such meeting, the Government of Pondicherry, has issued G. O. Ms. No. 25, dated 23. 2. 1982, creating seventy posts of Veterinary Field Assistants in lieu of the then existing Livestock Assistants Grade-II Post. Further, the post of Livestock Assistant Grade-I which was in existence then was also re-designated as Veterinary Field Assistant, as per G. O. Ms. No. 49, dated 29. 4. 1982. Thereafter, the pay scales of the petitioners were re-fixed in the time scale of Rs. 330-560 and thereafter as per the Assured Career Plan, for the petitioners who have completed 12 years of service, one financial upgradation was granted and for the petitioners who have completed 24 years of service, two financial upgradations were granted. Thereafter, by the impugned orders, the respondents have cancelled the second financial upgradation granted to the petitioners on the ground that the placement of the petitioners in the higher pay scale of Rs. 330-560 is treated as promotion and so the 12 years of service has to be counted from the date of placement in the higher pay scale namely 23. 2. 1982.

(2.) THESE individual orders, issued by the respondents to all the petitioners, were challenged by them before the Tribunal and the Tribunal, accepting the contention of the respondents that since the petitioners have already enjoyed promotion, they are not entitled for the first financial upgradation, has dismissed the Original Applications. Aggrieved, these two writ petitions are filed by the applicants before the Tribunal.

(3.) THE only question that arises for consideration in these two writ petitions is 'whether the upgradation of the post of Veterinary Field Assistant shall be construed as 'promotion' so as to deny the first financial upgradation to the petitioners?'