RAM INDER SHARMA Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition is preferred under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and petitioner seeks issuance of writ of certiorari or a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or directions, declaring that the respondents to count the services of the petitioner from 1980 instead of 1984 onwards for the purpose of grant of selection grade. It is also prayed that the respondents may be directed to fix the petitioner's pay scale from the date of the first appointment of 1980 as mentioned in the service book of the petitioner and order and direct the respondents to pay the salary as per the selection grade from June 2004. The petitioner also seeks injunction of this Court from preventing the respondents from recoveries being made at the instance of the petitioner.

(2.) The factual matrix as contended by petitioner, for considering the issues involved in this petition is as follows:

(3.) The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner was rightly given the senior scale in 1992 on the basis of 12 years of service counting his four years of service rendered in the previous school. It is submitted that the petitioner relies upon the circular dated 26 th July, 1973, wherein it is mentioned that the past service in an unaided school is to be counted for the purpose of seniority and for the purpose of pay fixation. It is a settled principle of law that for all purposes the date of joining of service in a school is to be considered for the purpose of fixation of pay, grant of senior scale etc. The petitioner having been given the senior scale in 1992, it is not open to the respondents to contend that for the selection grade the same principle will not be applied. The counsel further submitted that the impugned decision communicated vide letter dated 18 th October, 2005 is contrary to the well established principles of law. It is submitted that in the service book of the petitioner, there is a mention of four years of service in St.George School, Malad, Mumbai. According to service book there is no break in service and, hence, the petitioner is perfectly justified in contending that the pay fixation should be based on the first date of appointment in the St.George school, though, it was an unaided school. It is submitted that what is to be considered is that the said school was recognized but unaided. Whether the school is aided or unaided is totally immaterial if the concerned school is recognized by the Government. Looking from any angle the four years service in St.George school cannot be excluded for the purpose of counting the service for pay fixation. It is also submitted that the respondents be prevented from claiming any amount by way of difference for having paid the salary as per the senior scale. The respondents have no right to refix the pay or seniority or make recoveries from the petitioner. It is submitted that the petitioner is entitled to the salary according to the selection grade from June 2004. Inspite of the repeated request the salary has not been fixed after giving him the selection grade.