KRISHNA KANT DAS Vs. BIHAR STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present petitioners being the Assistant Operators have prayed for quashing of the office order dated 17.1.1995 contained in Annexure -4, issued by respondent No. 5, General Manager, Patratu Thermal Power Station, (hereinafter called as P.T.P.S. for the sake of convenience) of the Bihar State Electricity Board, (hereinafter called as B.S.E.B.), by which it was decided to cancel/withdraw the benefit of upgraded scale of pay extended to the petitioners w.e.f. 1.1.1989.

(2.) THE case of the petitioners is that they were appointed as Assistant Operators by issue of Annexure -1 dated 30.12.1983 by the competent authority and since then they were working as such. It is stated that pursuant to the standing order No. 684 dated 1.9.1988 and Resolution No. 264 dated 28.2.1986 of B.S.E.B., 38 posts of Assistant Operators in the Scale of 665 -16 -777 -20 -967 were upgraded in the scale of 725 -18 -905 -20 -1005 -22 -1115 for the removal of stagnation with effect from 1.1.1985 and, thereby, the petitioners were allowed to draw the said higher scale of pay by removal of stagnation with effect from 1.1.1989 and with effect from 5.8.1989 by issue of Office order dated 23.6.1989 (Annexure -2) and Office order dated 12.10.1989 (Annexure -2/A). Subsequently, by issue of Annexure -3, i.e. the letter dated 31.7.1992, B.S.E.B., Patna under the signature of its Secretary informed the General Manager of P.T.P.S. and others that the Board has decided to confirm all the temporary employees as permanent, who were working prior to 31.12.1986.

(3.) MR . R.N. Sahay, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that Bihar State Electricity Boards standing order No. 561 dated 1.7.1977 (Anne -xure -5) itself provided that 20 percent post of total number of post of each category was to be upgraded to the next higher scales of pay for the purpose of removal of stagnation and pursuant thereto the petitioners were provided the said benefit of higher scale of pay vide Annexures -2 and 2/A but without considering the same, wrongly and illegally the said benefit has been cancelled/withdrawn by the impugned order as contained in Annexure -4.