MONICA LOBO Vs. SPORTS AUTHORITY OF GOA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY this petition, the petitioner claims a writ, quashing the Order appointing the fourth respondent as Joint Director. The petitioner has also claimed that the Recruitment Rules should be framed by the Authorities and for a mandamus directing the Respondents No. 1, 2 and 3 to pay to the petitioner, the amount of Rs. 28,000/- being her salary for the period from 8. 10. 1999 to 31. 1. 2000. Today the petitioner restricts the relief claimed only as regards payment of wages for the period from 8th October, 1999 to 31st January, 2000.

(2.) THE learned Advocate for the Petitioner, seeks liberty to delete Respondents No. 2 and 3. Liberty granted.

(3.) THE petitioner was initially appointed in the establishment of the first respondent as a Promoter in Softball on contract basis. She was then appointed to the post of Project Officer on a contract for a fixed period. This contract was renewed periodically. By an Order of 8th October, 1999 the first respondent appointed her as Project Officer (Women) in regular pay scale of Rs. 6500-200-10500 from the date of the Order on temporary basis. She was informed that she would be on probation for a period of two years and that her appointment as Project Officer would be ratified by the General Body meeting of the first respondent. Accordingly, after a meeting was held the petitioner was regularised in the post as her appointment was ratified. This regularisation was made with effect from 1st February, 2000. The grievance of the petitioner is that after the ratification, instead of relating back the ratification to her initial appointment as Project Officer, the respondents have paid her the scale of Rs. 6500-10500 only after 1st February, 2000. The petitioner claims that she is entitled to Rs. 28,000/- for the period from 8th October, 1999 to 31st January, 2000.