INDER SINGH Vs. PUNJAB STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The grievance of the petitioner in this petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India is that the respondent-Punjab State Electricity Board ('Board' for short) hAs denied the benefit of re-fixation of pay in the higher pay scale as per the recommendations of the Fourth Punjab Pay Commission. The recommendations of the Fourth Pay Commission regarding implementation for Assured Career Progression CACP' - for short) Scheme were notified and circulated by the Punjab Government vide notification dated 17.4.2000 (Annexure-P-3) and adopted by the Board vide office order dated 20.2.2003 (Annexure-P 4). The reason for not extending the benefit of the higher pay scale to the petitioner is that he is not a direct recruit but a promotee officer.

(2.) The petitioner was appointed as Architectural Assistant in the service of the Board on 10.12.1976. He was promoted as Assistant Architect on 14.11.1983. he was further promoted to the higher post of Architect on 26.4.2000 (Annexure-P 1). The scale of the post of Architect has been Rs. 12,100-15,800 but while on the promoted post the petitioner was allowed the scale of Rs.10,350-14,900 i.e. of the Assistant Architect in terms of order dated 26.6.2000 (Annexure-P2). Therefore, the petitioner assails the action of the Board in not fixing his pay as Architect and also in the time bound promotional higher pay scale on completion of 4,9 and 14 years regular service as per aforesaid Punjab Government notification dated 17.4.2000 (Annexure-P3) and adopted by the Board vide letter dated 20.2.2003 (Annexure-P.4).

(3.) Reply has been filed by the respondent in which material facts as regards the service particulars are admitted. It is stated that the petitioner was inducted the service of the Board on 10.12.1976 and was promoted as Assistant Architect on 14.11.1983. Subsequently, he was promoted to the post of Architect on 26.4.2000. It is, therefore, submitted that the induction post of the petitioner is Architectural Assistant for the purpose of the AGP Scheme of time bound promotional scale after completion of 9 and 16 years of service. The petitioner, it is stated has been informed vide order dated 2.12.2003 (Annexure-R 1) that in terms of the circular No. 2 dated 20.2.2003 of the Finance Section, four tier scale is admissible to those Assistant Architects, who have been recruited directly on the said post. As the petitioner joined the said post i.e. Assistant Architect after promotion, therefore, under the said instructions dated 20.2.2003 the scale of Rs.14,500-18,100 is not admissible to him after 14 years service. It is also submitted that the notification dated 17.4.2000 (Annexure-P 3) issued by the Punjab Government has not been adpted by the Board in toto. Out of 9 categories mentioned in Annexure-A of the notification dated 17.4.2000 (Annexure-P.3), the Board has framed scales on the pattern of Punjab Government only for two categories. The purpose of adoption of the said notification was to regulate the grant of scales to these categories. The benefit was made available by the respondent-Board on the basis of the above mentioned notification to those who belong to the direct recruitment category. This fact had been mentioned in the said notification i.e. the scheme promulgated was meant for direct recruitment category. Besides, as per memo dated 2.3.2004 (Annexure-P11) of the Punjab Government Electricity Department (Power Branch) it has been intimated that the Board being a separate organization and not being a Punjab Government office could take its decision in the matter.