ARUN PRABHA Vs. PANJAB UNIVERSITY AND ANR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Petitioner had been working as a Library Assistant in the Library of the Panjab University, Chandigarh. She had worked as such from 16.9.1983 to 11.11.1983 in the regular pay scale of Rs. 700-1200, which was subsequently revised to Rs. 700-1600. Again she was appointed in the same capacity on 7.6.1985 at a fixed salary of Rs. 1100. She had been working intermittently from 7.6.1985 to 6.7.1985, again upto 30.6.1987. All this period she, was working on a fixed salary of Rs. 1100/- She was reappointed again as a Library Assistant in the Pay scale of Rs. 700-1200 for the period between 9.10.1987 to 29.7.1988, 16.8.1988 to 15.9.1988 and again from 10.10.1988 to 30.6.1989. It was from that date that her services were terminated.

(2.) The grievance of the writ-petitioner is that she has been working for almost 4 years and though for the earlier period when she was appointed in the pay scale of Rs. 700-1200 as also when she was appointed at a fixed pay of Rs. 1100/-, she was ultimately paid the pay scale of Rs. 700-1200 which was the regular pay scale of the counterparts of the petitioner but for the latter period she had not been given the pay scale of Rs. 700-1600, and her pay had been fixed only in the pay scale of Rs. 700-1200. She claims that she was doing the same duties as regular Library Assistant and there was no reason why she should not have been given the same pay scale i.e. Rs. 700-1600 especially when for the earlier period, she was given that pay scale. Her second grievance is that though the posts of Library Assistants are vacant and some juniors are being allowed to continue, her services had been illegally terminated.

(3.) The stand of the University, on the other hand, is that there are no vacant posts of Library Assistants and the petitioner has always worked against leave vacancies and, therefore, she has no right to be regularised or continued on the post of Library Assistant. It has been admitted that there are permanent regular vacancies of the posts of Assistant Librarian which is in the pay scale of Rs. 700-1600 for which advertisement was also issued but the posts could not be filled due to dispute with the University Grants Commission regarding the qualification for the post. According to the University, the post of Library Assistant falls in the pay scale of Rs. 700-1200 and a different post of Assistant Librarian falls in the pay scale of Rs. 700-1600. The Learned counsel for the petitioner has produced before me a notification No. 24838-62/Estt. dated 27.10.1983 of the University to show that the posts of Library Assistants were converted into the posts of Assistant Librarians and all Library Assistants by one stroke of pen were made Assistant Librarians in the pay scale of Rs. 700-1600. The notification has been kept on the record and marked by me as Annexure A. From the notification it is evident that the stand of the University that the posts of Assistant Librarians and Library Assistants were different, is not correct. If the posts of Assistant Librarians were the petitioner should have been considered for regularisation against one of those posts in view of Piara Singh, 1988 4 SLR 739. It has not been suggested at all on behalf of the University that the case of the petitioner was considered for regularisation against the post of Assistant Librarian and she was not found fit for the same.