PURNA CHANDRA MOHAPATRA Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The legality and propriety of the order dtd. 11/8/2010 passed by the Orissa Administrative Tribunal, Bhubaneswar dismissing the O.A. No. 625 of 1998, which was filed by the petitioner seeking stepping up of his pay at par with his junior, is under challenge in the instant writ petition.

(2.) The petitioner, while serving as Under Secretary in Orissa Administrative Service (OAS) Class-I (Jr.), approached the Orissa Administrative Tribunal seeking stepping of up of his pay at par with his junior- Ananta Charan Mohanty, who was also serving as OAS Class-I (Jr.). The case of the petitioner, in a nutshell, is that he joined as a Lower Division Assistant in Revenue and Excise Department on 30/7/1964, whereas his junior Ananta Charan Mohanty joined as Junior Typist on 8/4/1959. Subsequently, both of them were brought over to the Gr.I Assistant Cadre in Revenue and Exercise Department during the period from 28/4/1966 to 30/6/1976. The petitioner was inducted to OAS Class-II cadre, from the cadre of Gr.I Assistant, on 9/7/1979, and promoted to OAS Class-I (Jr) with effect from 15/9/1994, whereas Shri Mohanty was inducted from the cadre of Legal Assistant to OAS Class-II cadre, on 20/6/1980, and promoted to OAS Class-I (Jr) with effect from 29/11/1994. Even though Shri Mohanty was junior to the petitioner both in OAS Class-II and OAS Class-I (Jr) cadres, but was getting higher scale of pay than the petitioner. A comparative chart showing placement of the petitioner and Shri Mohanty in OAS Class-II and OAS Class-I (Jr) cadres and the basic salary granted to them at the entry level in both the ranks is given below:-

(3.) Mr. Basudev Pujari, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner contended that the petitioner and Shri Mohanty both were brought into the OAS Class-II cadre from two different sources. The petitioner was brought from the Assistant Cadre of Revenue and Excise Department, whereas Shri Mohanty was brought from the cadre of Legal Assistant. The petitioner was inducted to OAS Class-II cadre prior to Shri Mohanty and was placed at sl.no.327 whereas the latter was placed at sl.no.329 in the gradation list. On their promotion to OAS Class-I (Jr), in the gradation list, the petitioner got placement at sl. no. 494 and Shri Mohanty was placed at sl.no.496. The basic pay scale was granted to the petitioner as well as Shri Mohanty, at Rs.525.001150/- in OAS Class-II cadre and Rs.2200.004000/- in OAS Class-I (Jr) cadre. Consequently, the salary of the petitioner in OAS Class-II was fixed at Rs.575.00, whereas the salary of Shri Mohanty in OAS Class-II was fixed at Rs.730.00. Thereafter, the salary of the petitioner in OAS Class-I (Jr) was fixed at Rs.3000.00, whereas the salary of Shri Mohanty in OAS Class-I (Jr) was fixed at Rs.3400.00. As a consequence thereof, it is contended that the tribunal has failed to appreciate the factual matrix and proceeded to decide the matter on a wrong premises. There may be entry into OAS Class-II cadre from different cadres, but once they joined in the OAS Class-II cadre, the pay of the senior (petitioner) has to be at par with his junior (Shri Mohanty). In subsequent promotional posts also, such benefit should have been granted to the petitioner. It is further contended that for similarly situated employees, if such benefit has already been extended, why discrimination shall be made in respect of the petitioner, which would violate Article 14 of the Constitution of India.