RAJASTHAN SURVEY AND SETTLEMENT EMPLOYEES` ASSOCIATION Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition has been filed by the Association of Survey-ors/Amins of the Settlement Department, claiming that the provisions contained in Rajasthan Civil Services (Revised Pay Scales) Rules 1989, in short the Rules of 1989, in so far as they provide pay in the scale of 950-1680, to the Settlement Surveyors, be declared illegal, and the respondents be directed to pay to the Settlement Surveyors in the scale of 1200-2050, with consequential benefits. Other relief claimed is, for issuance of direction to the respondents, to grant Hard Duty Allowance, so also that the provisions contained in Rule 15 of the Rajasthan Traveling Allowance Rules, 1971, be declared illegal, and a direction has been claimed, to grant T.A. & D.A., to the Settlement Surveyors.

(2.) It is alleged by the petitioner, in the writ petition, that the revenue work of the Department is mainly divided in two parts, Survey and Settlement, and Revenue. Survey and Settlement Department conducts the survey of the lands other than urban lands, and after conducting the survey the settlement record is prepared, which records measurements of the lands, its situation, khasra number, classification, and determination of rent, and on that basis revenue records are prepared, for determining rights and titles of the parties. In the Settlement Department, duties of Settlement Surveyors have been prescribed by the Settlement Commissioner, as detailed in Annex.-1. It is then alleged, that like Rajasthan, Settlement Department is in existence in almost all the States, as well as in Government of India, and that, the main work of this Department, in all the States, and the Central Government, is the same, which is being done by the Settlement Department of Government of Rajasthan. With this background, it has been alleged, that the State Government had not been paying equal scales of pay to the surveyors working in the Settlement Department, in comparison to the scales given to the surveyors of the Central Government. Then, it is alleged, that along with other department, the employee of the Settlement Department also went on strike in January 1989, and a settlement was arrived at on 24.2.1989, to the effect, that a committee will be established by the State Government, which will decide the question of grant of equal pay scales to the employees of the State Government, in comparison to the employees of the Central Government. Accordingly, a committee was constituted, before whom, the petitioner Association submitted its claim, claiming pay scale of Rs. 1200-2040, and creation of grade of 1400-2600, as selection grade. It is alleged, that the Settlement Commissioner forwarded the claim, along with his recommendations in favour of the petitioner, vide Annexure-6. Then, representations were made, and the Assistant Secretary of the Government is also alleged to have made recommendations for grant of pay scale, as suggested by the petitioner. According to the petitioner, the Committee appears to have been satisfied with the submissions, that the pay scales deserves to be increased, but instead of making recommendations for grant of pay scale, equal to that of Central Government, the recommendations have been made for the grant of Scale No. 6 i.e., 950-1680, and accordingly the Revised Pay Scales Rules of 1989 have been framed. It is alleged, that along with the representation, the pay scale rules of various State Governments were also referred, to show, that number of other states are providing Settlement Surveyors the pay scale of 1200-2040, and that, persons working as Junior Surveyor in the Government of India are being given the pay scale of 1200-2040, since 1.1.1986. The details of the duties discharged by the Junior Surveyors in the Central Government, so also, the pay scale being given by the other states, have been pleaded in para B-11 of the writ petition. It is claimed, that all the State Governments have granted almost identical pay scales to the employees, including those working in the Settlement Department, equivalent to the pay scales given by the Central Government, but in Rajasthan, it has not been done so. Then in para B/12/(ii), it has been pleaded "that under the Rules of 1989 almost all categories of employees who were earlier getting pay in scale 880-1680 under the Rules of 1987 have been given pay in scale of 1200-2050". With this, the petitioner has purportedly produced a schedule, showing the details of pay, granted to the categories of the employees mentioned therein to show, that the petitioner should also be placed in the same pay scale. Then regarding T.A., it is pleaded, that when posted at particular place, and when they have to go distant place, for the purpose of conducting survey, and they can return only after the survey is complete, the employees are provided only the expenses incurred in reaching the place of survey, and return, and no allowance, in the form of Daily Allowance, or any other compensatory allowance, to meet the expenses for continuously remaining at that place, are given, and that, they are given the House Rent Allowance in accordance with the place of their posting, irrespective of the place where they have been sent for survey. It is also contended, that according to Rajasthan T.A. Rules, 1971, the halting allowance is admissible to an employee for each day of stay at a station beyond 8 kms. from the duty point, provided that the stay at that station on a particular day is for a period beyond 8 hours, but then, this is denied to the surveyors. It is also contended, that various State Governments, and the Central Government, have been compensating the persons so working, by making payment of special pay, or fixed T.A., on monthly basis, but then, all this is denied to the members of the petitioner Association. Then, Hard Duty Allowance has also been claimed, contending, that the Surveyors have to go for discharging the duties outside their headquarters, and have to remain in the field till the job is complete, and in that process have to remain out of headquarters for months together, but then, no facility has been provided for stay, or for compensating them towards expenses, and that, very nature of the work shows that Surveyors have to discharge the numerous duties, they have to travel on foot in remote areas, have to remain standing in the fields for hours together, irrespective of climate and thus, the duties cannot be said to be anything less than Hard Duty. It is contended, that previously Hard Duty Allowance was given under the Rules of 1961 but was subsequently stopped, and in 1969, and 1984 recommendations were made to restore the Hard Duty Allowance. Then, it is pleaded, that the constables in the Police Department are given Hard Duty Allowance Similarly the Guards working in the Excise Department are also given Hard Duty Allowance, and similarly the members of the petitioner Association are also entitled to Hard Duty Allowance. The claim is substantially sought to be supported, on the anvil of Article 14, 16 and 39(d).

(3.) In reply, it is contended, that the work done by the Surveyors employed in the Settlement Department of Government of Rajasthan is not identical to that of the Junior Surveyors working in the Central Government, and as such they cannot be compared. It is pleaded, that duties, responsibilities, qualification, and mode of recruitment of the Surveyors (Amins) under Government of India are not the same, as that of the Surveyors employed in the Government of Rajasthan. It was admitted, that the State Government took a policy decision, to revise the pay scale of the employees of the State Government, at par with the pay scale of the similar posts existing in the Government of India, and to implement, a committee was constituted, and the committee looked into the matter, also heard the representatives of the petitioner Association, but then, they could not satisfy the Committee, and they could not furnish any facts in support of their claim. It was pointed out, that the qualification of Surveyors under the State Government is Secondary, whereas the Surveyors under the Government of India are required to be Graduate. Thus, the pay of the two cadres cannot be compared. It was also pleaded, that the field of discharging duties by the Surveyors of the Central Government is wider than that of the Surveyors of the State Government. The Surveyors of the Central Government can be sent to any part of the country for the survey purpose, while the Surveyors of the State Government cannot, therefore, also they cannot claim parity. Regarding the plea of pay scales in other states, it was pleaded, that they are not legally entitled to pay such claim, as they cannot claim parity with the conditions, or pay scales, governing the pay scales of the other states. Regarding Schedule- A, it was pleaded, that the Surveyors cannot claim parity with the Teachers, as the qualifications of the two are different, inasmuch as, the teachers are required to undergo two years training, and obtain a certificate of B.S.T.C./B. Ed., which is an extra qualification, necessary for the appointment on the post. Regarding T.A., it was pleaded, that the field staff are not allowed T.A. for performing the duties within their jurisdiction as the normal part of their duties. However, they are allowed the actual fare, when they go for long movements, and are also paid actual cost of carrying Survey Instruments, whenever they are sent on duty. Then, replying para-D-6, wherein parity was sought to be claimed, with Settlement Inspectors, it was contended, that the Inspector is required to supervise five or more Surveyors, and he has to travel from village to village, and therefore, a fixed T.A. is allowed to Settlement Inspector, apart from the fact that the scope of the duties of the two posts is different. The duties include Traversers, survey soil classification, attestation and disposal of objection etc., and for this purpose, he is required to have a fast movement from one place to another. Then, regarding Hard Duty Allowance, it was pleaded, that earlier Hard Duty Allowance of Rs. 10/- per month was permissible to the Surveyors, but then, was subsequently merged with the new pay scale, as the new pay scale was adequately improved, as recommended by the Pay Commission in para-126 of Chapter XVI of the Ranawat Pay Commission, and therefore, they are not entitled to lay any claim on this count. It was pleaded, that the provisions of the Rules of 1989 are neither discriminatory, nor violative of Article 39(d) of the Constitution.