AJIT KUMAR MAHATO Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition has been preferred for issuance of a writ to quash the Office order issued vide memo No. 862 dated 06.4.2002 passed by the District Superintendent of Education, East Singhbhum at Jamshedpur. The main contention raised by the petitioner is that the respondent No. 3 misinterpreted the order passed by this Hon'ble Court dated 02.01.2002 in CWJC No. 1063 of 2000 and erroneously fixed the basic pay scale of Rs. 1400/ - which should have been Rs. 1900/ - per month with effect from 01.04.1989 as per 5th Pay Commission Revision. It has also challenged the decision of fixing petitioner's basic pay as Rs. 5300/ - per month in place of Rs. 6950/ - per month with effect from 01.01.1996 as per 6th Pay Commission Revision. In the order dated 02.01.2002 passed by this Hon'ble Court in CWJC No. 1063 of 2002 it has been specifically held as under: In my opinion, the petitioner is entitled to get revised pay scale with effect from 01.04.1989. The respondents are, therefore, directed to pay the revised pay scale to the petitioner on the basis of time bound promotion, if not already paid from Ist April, 1989. - -

(2.) THE petitioner submits that even the aforesaid direction has not been complied with till date and rather it was misinterpreted whereas his juniors have been extended the benefit and even promoted and higher scale has been given to one Kamal Kumar Chakrabarti. The respondents, in their counter affidavit have submitted that they have scrutinized the case of the petitioner and also the case of similarly situated persons and accordingly letters dated 30.03.2003 and dated 3.2.2002 were issued. It has also made a statement that vide letter dated 06.6.2003 they asked the petitioner to give service book and pay fixation form. It is also admitted that pay fixation in the revised pay scale shall be made after completion of 12 years from the date of Ist time bound promotion or after completion of 12 years of service whichever is later.

(3.) THE logical consequence, which should follow that in the 6th Pay revision the petitioner's scale of pay should have been Rs. 6950/ - with effect from 01.01.1996. The fact remains that Rs. 1400/ - is the statutory basic pay in the scale of Rs. 1400 -2600/ - and the same is obviously erroneous and unsustainable.