RAJWENDRA PRATAP SINGH Vs. STATE OF M.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioners who are Stenographers, Sr. Stenographers and Stenographers Selection Grade in the M.P. State Minor Forest Produce (Trade and Development) Cooperative Federation (Respondent No. 2) have filed this petition complaining that although the respondent No. 2 Federation has adopted the recommendation of the Fifth Pay Commission and revised the scales of the employees of the Federation, the Petitioners have not been appropriately fixed in the corresponding scales applicable in their case as per the said recommendation of the Fifth Pay Commission. Learned counsel for the Petitioners has referred to Annexure P -7 in which the Federation had sent a proposal to the State Government pointing out that in relation to the 12 posts in the Federation, the pay scales were equivalent to the corresponding scales in the Government while in the case of 8 posts, the pay scales in the Federation were higher. The Federation, therefore, recommended revision of pay scales of its employees on the basis of the pay scales in which they had earlier been fixed. By communication dated 28.7.1998 (Annexure P -8), the State Government informed the Federation that the Registrar of the Cooperative Society alone was competent to sanction the revised pay scales. However, by communication dated 7.9.1998 (Annexure P -9), the Registrar on being approached informed the Federation that his sanction was not necessary as the Federation was under the Administrative Control of the Forest Department and that Forest Department should be approached in the matter. Yet by another communication dated 17.9.1998 (Annexure P -10), the State Government informed the Federation that there was no proposal to grant pay scales different from the scales recommended by the Fifth Pay Commission and, therefore, the anomalies in the pay scales granted earlier should be removed. On the basis of the said letter, the learned counsel for the respondent No. 2 contends that the petitioners can be granted only such pay scales as are applicable in the case of the employees who hold similar posts in the Government.

(2.) THE basic dispute between the parties is as to whether the petitioners on the basis of the pay scales which were granted to them prior to the recommendation of the Fifth Pay Commission, are entitled to claim pay scales as per the recommendation of the Commission on the basis of the earlier scales in which they had been fixed. It is not disputed that the respondent No. 2 Federation is registered as a Cooperative Society under the ''M.P. Cooperative Societies Act, 1960" and under section 55(2) thereof, a dispute can be raised before the Registrar concerning all matters relating to the service of the employees. Whether or not the petitioners have been appropriately fixed in accordance with the decision of the respondent No. 2 to grant the revised pay scales as per the recommendation of the Fifth Pay Commission can also be gone into by the Registrar under section 55(2) if a dispute is raised by the petitioner. Since for this disputed question, evidence can also be brought before the Registrar, it would be appropriate for the petitioners to raise a dispute before him in the matter.