Tripura High Court
Unknown vs The State Of Tripura on 20 April, 2018
Author: S. Talapatra
Bench: S. Talapatra
THE HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA
AGARTALA
WP(C)330 of 2014
1. Sri Ajit Mohan Jamatia,
son of Sri Nabamohan Jamatia,
resident of Village-Darjeeling Tilla,
P.O. Karailong, P.S. Teliamura, Khowai,
PIN : 799205
2. Shri Panendra Tripura,
son of Shri Barnachandra Tripura,
resident of Village-North Kalapania,
P.O. Satchand, P.S. Manu Bazar,
Sabroom, South Tripura, PIN :799143
3. Sri Amar Chandra Roy,
son of Sri Khokan Chandra Roy,
resident of Village-Kalachara,
P.S. Manubazar, Sabroom, South Tripura,
PIN :799143
4. Shri Sudip Das,
son of Shri Sona Mohan Das,
resident of Village and P.O. Moharchera,
P.S. Khowai District, Tripura, PIN : 799203
5. Shri Jagabandhu Kalai,
son of late Dinadayal Kalai,
resident of Village, P.O. and P.S. Ompinagar,
Amarpur, District : Gomati, PIN :799108
6. Shri Bir Bikram Jamatia,
son of Shri Nanda Lal Jamatia,
resident of Village Moharpara,
P.O. Uttar Pulinpur, P.S. Teliamura,
District : Khowai, PIN :799203
7. Shri Biswajit Chakma,
son of Shri Sukhamoy Chakma,
resident of Village, P.O. & P.S. Chailengta,
District : Dhalai, PIN :799273
8. Shri Kajal Kalai,
son of Shri Mangal Sadhan Kalai,
resident of Village-Gantachera, P.O. Kulai,
P.S. Ambassa, District : Dhalai, PIN : 799204
9. Sri Amit Karmakar,
son of Jogendra Karmakar,
resident of Village & P.O. Barjala,
P.S. West Agartala, District : West Tripura,
PIN :799202
10. Shri Arup Das Chowdhury,
son of late Arun Das Chowdhury,
resident of Village Purba Aralia,
P.O. Aralia, P.S. East Agartala,
District : West Tripura, PIN :799204
Page 1 of 7
WP(C)330 of 2014
11. Shri Pancha Ratan Chakma,
son of late Mitra Kanti Chakma,
resident of Village Chandrasingh Para,
P.O. Karbook, P.S. Karbook, Gomati,
Tripura, PIN:799104
12. Shri Badal Roy,
son of Shri Rathindra Roy,
resident of Village & P.O. Gukulnagar,
P.S. Bishalgarh, District : Sepahijala,
PIN : 799102
13. Shri Prajesh Kanti Chakma,
son of Shri Bhuban Mohan Chakma,
resident of Village & P.O. Silchari,
Karbook, District : Gomati, PIN : 799104
14. Shri Subash Das,
son of late Gourchand Das,
resident of Village & P.O. Sarma,
P.S. Gandacherra, District : Dhalai,
PIN : 799284
15. Shri Pabandip Chakma,
son of Shri Amar Chand Chakma,
resident of Village-Sukiyakarbaripara,
Polaljuri, P.S. Kanchanpur,
District : North Tripura
16. Shri Ranjan Paul,
son of Shri Jatindra Paul,
resident of Village-Jamirghat,
P.O. Kamalghat, P.S. Lefunga,
District : West Tripura
17. Shri Suman Baidya,
son of Shri Matilal Baidya,
resident of Village and P.O. Nidaya,
P.S. Jatrapur, District : Sepahijala
----Petitioner(s)
Versus
1. The State of Tripura,
represented by the Chief Secretary,
Government of Tripura, Agartala, Civil Secretariat,
P.O. Kunjaban, PIN :799006
2. The Secretary to the Government of Tripura,
Department of Social Welfare and Social Education,
Civil Secretariat, P.O. Kunjaban, Agartala, PIN : 799006
3. The Director of Social Welfare and Social
Education,
Government of Tripura,
Abhoynagar, P.O. Abhoynagar, Agartala,
P.S. East Agartala, District : West Tripura, PIN : 799005
4. The Secretary,
Finance Department, Government of Tripura,
Civil Secretariat, New Capital Complex,
Page 2 of 7
WP(C)330 of 2014
P.O. Kunjaban, Agartala,
PIN : 799006, District : West Tripura
----Respondent(s)
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. R. Datta, Advocate
For Respondent(s) : Mr. D. Sharma, Addl. G.A.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. TALAPATRA
Judgment and Order
20/04/2018
Heard Mr. R. Datta, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners as well as Mr. D. Sharma, learned Addl. G.A. appearing for the respondents.
2. The petitioners are all working as the Supervisor (ICDS) under the respondents in the Department of Social Welfare and Social Education. In 2009, when the pay revision was carried out by introducing Tripura State Civil Services (Revised Pay) Rules, 2009 Supervisors (ICDS) were fixed in the scale of pay of Rs.5,310- 24,000/- with Grade Pay of Rs.2,100/- in Pay Band-2 at Sl. No.9 of Part-C of the said ROP Rules,1999, whereas 10 other equivalent posts, according to the petitioners, were fixed in the scale of pay of Rs.5,310-24,000/- with Grade Pay of Rs.2400 at Sl. No.10 of Part-C of ROP Rules,1999. The petitioners agitated for the pay scale at Sl. No.10 of Part-C of ROP Rules, 1999. Nothing positive did surface the petitioners in response to such agitation persuaded to file a writ petition being WP(C)No.329/2013 praying direction on the respondent to give the said pay scale. The said writ petition was disposed of by the order dated 07.11.2013 directing the petitioner to submit a detailed representation before the respondents raising all Page 3 of 7 WP(C)330 of 2014 grievances for considering their prayer within a period of one month from the date of the said order. Thereafter, the petitioners preferred a petition for drawing up contempt proceeding as the directions were not complied by the respondents, being Cont(Cas)No.22/2014.
3. During pendency of the said proceeding, the respondents passed the order under No.F.34(514)- DSWE/LA/2013/1479(15) dated 10.07.2014 by rejecting the representation as filed by the petitioners. It is apparent from the said order dated 10.07.2014 [Annexure-6 to the writ petition] that on consideration on the demand of the petitioners, the Chief Secretary had passed the order observing interalia that :
"From record it appears that the post of Supervisor (ICDS) held by the petitioner was provided the revised pay scale of Rs.4,200- 8,650/- with effect from the 1st January 1996 under the TSCS (RP) Rules,1999; whereas the post of Panchayat Extension Officer in the Panchayat Department was provided the revised pay scale of Rs.5,000-10,300/- with effect from the 1st January 1996 under the TSCS (RP) Rules,1999 as corresponding to its pre-revised pay scale of Rs.1,450-3,710/- under the TSCS(RP) Rules,1988, meaning thereby that the above two categories of posts are not comparable. Therefore, the claim for allowing Grade Pay of Rs.2,400/- in Pay Band-2 (Rs.5,310-24,000/-) to the post of Supervisor (ICDS) under the Social Welfare & Social Education Department is not tenable."
4. Mr. R. Datta, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners has submitted that those posts are in the same class. In this regard, Mr. Datta, learned counsel has referred to Para-11a of the writ petition where the petitioner has asserted that the Pay and Pension Revision Committee constituted by the Government of Tripura submitted its report in 2017 after considering revision of pay structure of the State Government Employee in retrospect with the revision that was carried on, in 1974 and thereafter particularly Page 4 of 7 WP(C)330 of 2014 w.e.f. 01.01.1986, 01.01.1996 and 01.01.2006. After hearing all concerned, and the employees associations in particular the said committee recommended at pages 132 and 133 of the report that the Supervisor, ICDS are getting less pay than that of Panchayat Extension Officers, Revenue Inspectors, Co-Operative Inspectors, Labour Inspectors, Food Inspectors etc. Since implementation of ROP Rules, 2009 as modified, the Grade Pay of Supervisor, ICDS is Rs.2100/- whereas for the other posts as referred before that is Rs.2400/- under the ROP Rules, 2009. The Committee has examined the matter and recommended that the concerned administrative Department may take up with Finance Department for granting the grade pay to the Supervisor, ICDS of Rs.2400/- under the ROP Rules, 2009. The said report was submitted by the committee on 31.05.2017 but till now the Administrative Department of the petitioner, in particular the respondent No.3, did not take up the issue with the Finance Department. This averment has been, however, incorporated by way of amendment. In this writ petition, the petitioner has urged for quashing the order under No.34(514)DSWE/LA/2013/1479(15) dated 10.07.2014 [Annexure-6 to the writ petition] and for commanding the respondents to undo the injustice the petitioners are facing since 01.01.1986. It is to be noted that the petitioners have confined their relief to grant of Rs.2,400/- as the grade pay in the Pay Band-2 (Rs.5,310-24,000/-) vide Sl No.10 of Part-C of Tripura State Civil Services (Revised Pay) Rules,2009 for the post of Supervisor (ICDS) with effect from 01.01.2006.
5. Mr. Datta, learned counsel has submitted that no reason whatsoever has been provided by the respondents while Page 5 of 7 WP(C)330 of 2014 taking away the parity in the pay scale vis-a-vis the posts equated all through for purpose of granting the pay scale and associated benefits.
6. Mr. D. Sharma, learned Addl. G.A. appearing for the respondents has submitted that the petitioners do not have any indefeasible right to claim the said grade pay inasmuch as they have failed to project a case which can be considered on the doctrine of "equal pay for equal work". There the difference of duties and responsibilities that exists amongst the posts which are enjoying the pay scale in Part-C of Sl. No.9 of the ROP Rules, 2009 and the posts those are enjoying the pay scale in Part-C as the Sl. No.10 of the ROP Rules, 2009 is apparent. There is no attempt on behalf of the petitioner to demonstrate the same nature of duties and responsibilities attached to the costs.
7. Mr. Sharma, learned Addl. G.A. has also referred to the Para-14 of the reply where the respondents have asserted that :
"In fact posts as claimed by the petitioner are not comparable and hence it cannot justify to give a further better scale to the petitioners."
8. Further, Mr. Sharma, learned Addl. G.A. has relied on a decision of this court in Rajesh Bhattacharjee and Another versus State of Tripura and Others reported in (2016) 1 TLR 741 where almost on a similar context, this court had occasion to hold that the pay scales are regulated by the rules and the rules are framed on the foundation of various studies of the comparative duties and the responsibilities and other factors and unless there is any challenge against the rules, the pay scale in isolation cannot be challenged by the petitioners.
Page 6 of 7
WP(C)330 of 2014
9. Having scrutinised the records and appreciated the submissions made by the learned counsel, this court is of the view that the court does not have jurisdiction to decide the pay scale with associated benefits inasmuch as that exercise relates to so many economic factors, intrinsically the call can only be taken by the expert agency having equipped with materials to weigh. However, it appears from the report of Pay and Pension Revision Committee that the said committee had recommended in the following manner:
Social Supervisor ICDS are getting less pay than that of Panchayat Extension Welfare & Officer, Revenue Inspector, Cooperative Inspector, Labour Inspector, Social Food Inspector etc. since implementation of ROP Rules,1988. The Education grade pay of Supervisor ICDS is Rs.2100/- whereas that of others is Rs.2400/- under the ROP Rules,2009. The Committee has examined the matter and recommends that the concerned administrative Department may take up with Finance Department for consideration.
10. Having due regard to the said recommendation by the said Committee, this court is of the view that the respondent No.3 shall take up the issue with the Finance Department within a month from the date when the petitioner shall submit a copy of this order and the Finance Department shall decide the aspect within next 3(three) months from the date when they would receive the communication from the respondent No.3 along with a copy of this order.
Having observed thus, this writ petition stands disposed of.
There shall be no order as to costs.
JUDGE Sabyasachi. B Page 7 of 7 WP(C)330 of 2014