BHIM MAHTO Vs. CENTRAL COALFIELDS LIMITED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard counsel for the parties.

(2.) By the impugned order dated 13th April 2013 (Annexure-7) issued by the Welfare Officer (T), Rajrappa Project, Central Coalfields Limited, claim of the petitioners for giving the benefit of next higher grade in terms of the Implementation Instruction No. 32 of N.C.W.A.-VI has been refused.

(3.) The entire case of the petitioners hinges on the question as to whether they are entitled as per the said Implementation Instruction to the next higher grade in view of the fact that they were diverted by the decision of the Management contained at Annexure-1 dated 28th May 1982 to a non-technical job of Drill Operator, though they had initially ITI certificate at the time of their appointment as a Trainee (Electrical/Mechanical). Petitioners claim to be covered by the Implementation Instruction No. 32 issued under the N.C.W.A.-VI on 26th January 2002. On cumulative reading of the said instruction, it indicates that the existing ITI personnel who had completed certain number of years on training and have been regularized as such, would be notionally placed in the next higher grade with effect from 01st January 2000, but the financial benefit will accrue with effect from 01st January 2001 and this would be personal to them as one time arrangement. Other conditions in the said instructions are also to the same effect, however giving different years of completion of training in existing category/grade. The claim of the petitioners have been denied by the impugned order which refers to a subsequent clarification dated 14th/15th January 2003 as per which, Implementation Instruction No. 32 has been further clarified to mean that the benefit will be given to the existing ITI Personnel who were appointed on the basis of the ITI qualification and are working in the cadre designation of technical work. On their placement in the next higher category/grade, they will carry their own designation. However, in order to identify such person, the word 'ITI' will be mentioned against their designation. On their regular promotion, the word 'ITI' will be deleted and appropriate designation as per cadre scheme will be given. This clarification came in respect of earlier clarification dated 11th June 2002 which is annexed to the writ petition itself. Both petitioners and the respondents relied upon the same Circular dated 11th June 2002. Clause-(i) of the said circular which is material for determination of the instant issue, is being quoted here-under: