B.JAGGA RAO Vs. GRIDCO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. B. K. Nayak, learned counsel appearing for the opp.parties 2 and 3. In spite of notice, none have entered appearance on behalf of opp.party No.1.

(2.) THE petitioner was serving under the Orissa State Electricity Board (for short 'O.S.E.B.) as a Store Assistant. He continued to serve as such under opp.party No.1 -GRIDCO after the O.S.E.B. was taken over by the GRIDCO. It is the case of the petitioner that as the person who were subsequently appointed as Store Assistants received higher scale of pay, the petitioner made his grievances before the authority, pursuant to which his scale of pay was raised Rs.60 -1 -75 to Rs.110 -8(5) -10(10) -250/ - with effect from 1.4.1969. On 30.6.1980, the Secretary of O.S.E.B. having raised the scale of pay of the petitioner as stated above with effect from 1.4.1969, the Executive Engineer (Electrical), Berhampur communicated the said fact to the petitioner under Annexure -2 to the writ petition. The petitioner alleges that in view of such revision in the scale of pay, he was entitled to the revised scale of pay and all consequential benefits, but however on 10.8.1984, the Superintending Engineer revoked the order passed by the Secretary of O.S.E.B. without assigning any reason and without giving any notice to the petitioner. In the meantime, the petitioner repeatedly made representations regarding his scale of pay objecting to the action taken by the Superintending Engineer in revoking the order passed by the Secretary, O.S.E.B. It appears that subsequently the O.S.E.B. was taken over by the GRIDCO and thereafter it was fragmented into SOUTHCO and other distribution companies. The petitioner also sent repeated reminders to the authority of SOUTHCO i.e.opp.parties 2 and 3 with regard to his entitlement to receive higher scale of pay with effect from 1.6.1994 as was decided by his employer i.e. the Secretary, O.S.E.B. The petitioner on attaining the age of superannuation has retired from service in the meantime.

(3.) A counter affidavit has been filed by the opp.parties 2 and 3 being SOUTHCO. The stand taken by the opp.parties 2 and 3 in the said counter affidavit is that the Executive Engineer erroneously enhanced the scale of pay of the petitioner which was in contravention of a previous Office Order No.13813 dated 6.8.1973. The said office order has been annexed to the counter affidavit as Annexure -A/3.