STATE OF RAJASTHAN Vs. MAQBOOL AHMED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) D .B. Civil Special Appeal No. 148/1979 filed by the State of Rajasthan and others under Section 18 of the Rajasthan High Court Ordinance has been directed against the judgment of the learned single Judge of this Court dated 24th September, 1979 which he passed in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 825 of 1978 Maqbool Ahmed v. The State of Rajasthan and Ors. and whereby the order marked Anexure 2 dated 24th October, 1978 was quashed and it was declared that Maqbool Ahmed petitioner is entitled to get his pay fixed in the pay scale of Rs. 180 -425 on the post of foreman grade I and accordingly his pay shall be so fixed.

(2.) THE relevant facts giving rise to the writ petition out of which this special appeal arises may be briefly stated as follows: Maqbool Ahmed petitioner was appointed on the post of mechanic grade II on 22 -12 -1954. Thereafter he was promoted to the post of mechanic grade I on 1 -3 -1956 and was latter on promoted on a temporary basis to the post of foreman grade I vide order dated 7 -3 -1975. Aggrieved by this order of his promotion on a temporary basis to the post of foreman grade I the petitioner filed a writ petition in Court, wherein it was prayed that he should be substantively appointed to the post of foreman grade I with effect from the date on which persons junior to him such as Shri Premsingh and Shri Gheesalal were so appointed. Thereafter by order dated 21st July, 1975 the petitioner was fixed in pay scale of Rs. 180 -10 -220 -15 -385 -20 -425 with effect from 29 -3 -1975 with a basic salary of Rs. 265/ - per month as is evident from Annexure I. Then on 24 -10 -1978 an order was passed that the petitioner's fixation in pay scale of Rs. 180 -425 was wrong as he did not possess the requisite qualifications laid down by the Government in its notification dated 20 -2 -70. The effect of this order was that the petitioner was ordered to be fixed in pay scale of Rs. 150 -330 with basic salary at Rs. 255/ - per month and the over payment of Rs. 850/ -made to him was ordered to be recovered from him by deducting 1/3 amount of his salary from October, 1978, and he was ordered to be paid Rs. 690/ - per month in the pay scale of Rs. 440 -470. This order is marked Annexure 2. It contained a statement of deductions also and it was passed on the basis of the Rajasthan Civil Services New Pay Scale Amendment Rules 1970 hereinafter referred to as the Amendment Rules 1970 which were made effective since 1 -9 -1968. Aggrieved by the amendment Rules 1970 and the order marked Annexure 2 dated 24th October, 1978 the petitioner has filed this writ petition out of which this special appeal has arisen. The writ petition was admitted and notices were given to the State of Rajasthan and other respondents. The respondents contested the writ petition and filed reply thereto on 24th January, 1979. After the reply was filed the petitioner sought permission to amend the writ petition which was accorded to him. The petition filed the amended writ petition to which no reply was given by the respondents. In reply to the writ petition before it was amended the respondents Nos. 1 to 3 alleged that the petitioner was wrongly fixed in the pay scale of Rs. 180 -425 with effect from 29 -3 -1975 with basic salary at Rs. 265/ - by an order of the State Health Transport Officer under the mistaken relief that he possessed the requisite qualifications for fixation in the pay scale of Rs. 180 -425. It was further urged in the written reply that the petitioner was entitled to be fixed in the lower pay scale of Rs. 150 -330 because Diploma holders in automobiles alone could have been fixed in the aforesaid pay scale and as the petitioner had not obtained any Diploma in automobile (Engineering) the mistake was rectified by the respondents when it was pointed out by the audit in 1978 vide order dated 24 -10 -1978 marked Annexure Ex. RII. As regards the allegation, that the petitioner was discriminated in this matter and persons, namely, Gheesalal and Premsingh who were junior to him in the same cadre were fixed in the pay scale of Rs. 180 -425, the respondents Nos. 1 to 3 replied that Gheesalal and Prem Singh also were wrongly fixed in the aforesaid grade and when the mistake was pointed out by the audit steps for making recoveries from their salary have already been taken as is evident from orders marked Annexure Ex. Rule III and Ex. Rule IV and so there is no discrimination between the petitioner and the two persons, namely, Gheesalal and Prem Singh.

(3.) WE have perused the record and heard Mr. H.N. Calla Deputy Government Advocate for the appellants and Mr. M. Mridul learned Counsel for the respondents. The following contentions have been raised before us by Mr. H.N. Calla Deputy Government Advocate for the appellants: (1) That the referred to above two authorities of this Court on which the judgment of the learned single Judge is passed were not applicable to the facts and circumstances of the instant case.(2) That in F.C. Puri's case (1975 Weekly Law Notes (Unreported Cases) 22, this Court did not hold that the Rules prescribing different pay scales on the basis of higher qualifications at the time of initial appointment were violative of the Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India and so the learned single Judge was not justified in holding that different pay scale for persons employed in the same cadre cannot be prescribed on the basis of academic qualifications. (3) There is rational and reasonable nexus for providing the higher pay scale on the basis of higher academic qualifications because such qualifications have relevance to efficient discharge of duties. Hence without striking down the Rules prescribing different pay scales as violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India, the learned single Judge of this Court committed an error in directing that the petitioner be fixed in higher pay scale inspite of the fact that the did not possess requisite qualifications for such fixation.