Gauhati High Court
Union Of India And 3 Ors vs Shri Purushottam Dass on 18 November, 2019
Author: Ajai Lamba
Bench: Ajai Lamba, Achintya Malla Bujor Barua
Page No.# 1/3
GAHC010090162018
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : Review.Pet. 98/2018
1:UNION OF INDIA AND 3 ORS
THROUGH SECY., MINISTRY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY AND OCEAN
DEVELOPMENT, NEW MEHRAULI ROAD, NEW DELHI.
2: THE SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF INDIA
MINISTRY OF EARTH SCIENCES PRITHVI BHAVAN
LODHI ROAD
NEW DELHI 110003
3: THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF METEROLOGY
INDIA METEOROLOGICAL DEPTT.
MAUSAM BHAWAN
LODHI ROAD
NEW DELHI 110003
4: THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR GENERAL OF METEOROLOGY
REGIONAL METEOROLOGICAL CENTRE
INDIA METEOROLOGICAL DEPTT.
GUWAHATI 78101
VERSUS
1:SHRI PURUSHOTTAM DASS
S/O SHRI SUNKARAM, ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER (RETIRED), R/O VILL. ,
P.O. KANDI, TEH BAROH DIST., KANGRA, HIMACHAL PRADESH 176054
Counsel for petitioners : Mr. SC Keyal.
Counsel for respondent : Mr. S Dutta
Page No.# 2/3 BEFORE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. AJAI LAMBA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ACHINTYA MALLA BUJOR BARUA 18.11.2019 (Ajai Lamba, C.J.) This review application is directed against order dated 18.5.2015 rendered by this Court in WP(C) 912/2010 titled Purushottam Dass v. Union of India and others.
2. Facts in brief, which are not disputed, are that the respondent/writ petitioner initially joined as Observatory Attendant in India Metrological Department (for short, IMD) in 1971. Later, he was promoted as LDC, UDC and thereafter, as Administrative Officer. As per recommendation made by 3rd Central Pay Commission, the Administrative and Technical wing of IMD was separated. As per separated recruitment rules, UDC could seek promotion to the post of Scientific Assistant through limited departmental promotion. However, 5th Central Pay Commission prescribed pay scale for the post of Administrative Officer in the range of Rs.7500-12000/- subject to fulfillment of conditions prescribed therein.
3. The petitioner was appointed as Administrative Officer, Group 'B' Gazetted but was not allowed scale of Rs.7500-12000/-. Rather his pay was fixed at Rs.6500-10500/-. The distinction was drawn by the department on the analogy that the petitioner had been promoted from post which carried scale of Rs.2000-3500/-, and not the scale of Rs.2375- 3500/-.
4. Central Administrative Tribunal dismissed the claim of the respondent/writ petitioner. Writ Court reversed the decision of the Administrative Tribunal while holding that there cannot be two categories of Administrative Officers. Persons posted as Administrative Officers discharged similar duties based on their pre-revised pay scales. The analogy adopted by the Writ Court is that prior to promotion to the post of Administrative Officer, the respondent/writ petitioner might have drawn pay scale of Rs.2000-3500/-, however, after being promoted to the post of Administrative Officer, no distinction could be made between two persons who were drawing different pay scales on the feeder post (Rs.2000-3500/- and Rs.2375-3500/-)
5. We have questioned learned counsel for the review applicant, Sri SC Keyal as to Page No.# 3/3 whether the post of Administrative Officer carries two pay scales? Sri Keyal has fairly contended that post of Administrative Officer carries only one pay scale i.e. Rs.7500-12000/-. Sri Keyal further admits that the respondent/writ petitioner was indeed posted/promoted to the post of Administrative Officer.
6. Considering the said admitted fact, we find no reason to interfere in review jurisdiction.
7. The review petition is dismissed.
8. We have also taken notice of the fact that order passed by the Writ Court has been complied with vide the order dated 26.12.2016. We have also taken into account the fact that decision rendered by the Writ Court was challenged before the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India. The appeal has been dismissed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court on the ground of delay and laches.
JUDGE CHIEF JUSTICE
18.11.2019
Comparing Assistant