(1.) , learned counsel for the petitioner. None appears on behalf of the respondents.
(2.) The writ petitioner, Debajit Sarma was appointed as a Deputy Marketing Manager Grade II in the North Eastern Regional Agricultural Marketing Corporation Ltd, (NERAMAC) on probation. On completion of the period of probation, he was confirmed in the post in question. The appointment of the petitioner was in the scale of pay with Industrial Dearness Allowance. In terms of the guidelines laid down in a letter dated 4.4.1990 of the Additional Secretary, Bureau of Public Enterprises, Ministry of Industry, Govt of India; the pay scales in the IDA Pattern were required to be revised with effect from 1.1.1987 and thereafter as per Clause VII of the aforesaid letter such revision was required to be carried out every five (5) years. The parameters for revision of the pay scales were set out in an enclosure to the aforesaid letter dated 4.4.1990, Thereafter, though revision of pay was granted to the petitioner with effect from 1.1.1987 the subsequent revisions required to be made every five (5) years were not so made and the petitioner continues to be in the pay scale which was granted to him in the year 1987. As the numerous representations filed have remained un-answered, the petitioner having no other alternative has approached this Court for an appropriate writ directing the respondent Nos 2 and 3 to grant to the petitioner the benefit of appropriate pay revisions in accordance with the guidelines and norms in force.
(3.) The respondent Nos 2 and 3 have not appeared in spite of due service of notice. Consequently the stand of the said respondents for not revising the pay of the petitioner in the years 1992,1997 and 2002 (every five years) is not known. The petitioner had submitted several representations to the respondents for the redress of the grievances and some of such representations have been brought on record. As to why the said representations have gone un-answered, is also not disclosed by the respondents.