BHAGIRATHI SINGH Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioners before this Court, who are 8 in number, claim to have been appointed as Clerk in different recognised and aided junior high-schools. According to the petitioners, they were provided pay-scale of Rs. 5000-8000 in place of 4500-7000 w.e.f. 01.01.1996 with reference to the Government Order dated 24.10.2007, which provided for grant of time scale to the employees working in educational/vocational training institutions in terms of the recommendation of the Pay Samiti of 1997-99.

(2.) It appears that the Finance Controller in the Basic Education Directorate of Uttar Pradesh raised an objection with regard to the grant of pay-scale of Rs. 5000-8000 to the petitioners. It was recorded that in terms of the Government Order dated 24.10.2007, the petitioners were only entitled to the salary in the pay-scale of Rs. 4000-6000. This order was challenged by the petitioners by means of writ petition no. 47175 of 2011. The High Court after noticing the relevant facts disposed of the said writ petition vide order dated 20.09.2011, which reads as follows:

(3.) In compliance to the order of the High Court referred to above, the matter has been examined in detail by the Secretary of Basic Education. It has been recorded that persons like the petitioners, who were working in junior high-schools wherein there is no post of Head Clerk, they are not entitled to the next higher pay-scale of Rs. 5000-8000. It has been held that on completion of 14 years of service, employees like the petitioners are entitled to the pay-scale of Rs. 3200-4900 and on completion of 24 years of service, they were entitled to next higher pay-scale of Rs. 4000-6000. The objection of the Finance Controller dated 19.10.2009 has been held to be strictly in accordance with the Government Order dated 24.10.2007. It has been clarified that the petitioners have wrongly been provided the pay-scale of Rs. 5000-8000. It is against this order of the Secretary, Basic Education dated 27.12.2011 and the audit objection dated 19.10.2009, which also contains a direction for recovery of the excess amount paid have been challenged by means of the present writ petition.