Madhya Pradesh High Court
Dilip Pujari vs Principal Secretary State Of M.P. And 4 ... on 22 April, 2024
Author: Vivek Rusia
Bench: Vivek Rusia
-1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT I N D O R E
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIVEK RUSIA
ON THE 22nd OF APRIL, 2024
WRIT PETITION No. 2034 of 2012
BETWEEN:-
DILIP PUJARI S/O LATE BHASKAR RAO PUJARI, AGED ABOUT 56
YEARS, OCCUPATION: SERVICE H-11,OFFICE COLONY,INFRONT OF
KILESHWAR MAHADEV MANDIR,NEEMUCH (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....PETITIONER
(BY SHRI ASHOK KUMAR SETHI, LEARNED SENIOR ADVOCATE
ALONGWITH SHRI HARISH JOSHI, ADVOCATE.)
AND
PRINCIPAL SECRETARY STATE OF M.P. AND 4 ORS. GOVT. MINING
1.
DEPT.,MANTRALAYA,BHOPAL (MADHYA PRADESH)
PRINCIPAL SECRETARY FINANCE DEPARTMENT,MANTRALAYA
2.
STATE OF M.P. VALLABH BHAVAN , BHOPAL (MADHYA PRADESH)
PRINCIPAL SECRETARY GENERAL ADMINISTRATION DEPARTMENT
3.
MANTRALAYA VALLABH BHAWAN,BHOPAL (MADHYA PRADESH)
4. THE DIRECTOR OF MINES,GOVT.OF M.P. (MADHYA PRADESH)
5. THE COLLECTOR(MINING DEPTT.) (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENTS
(BY SHRI TARUN KUSHWAH, GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE.)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This petition coming on for orders this day, the court passed the
following:
ORDER
The petitioner has filed the present petition seeking quashment of order dated 22.10.2011 passed by the respondent No.4 whereby the claim of the petitioner for revision of pay scale of Rs.160-2720 with corresponding revised pay-scales treating him the "Draftsmen" has been Signature Not Verified Signed by: DIVYANSH SHUKLA Signing time: 26-04-2024 18:49:35 -2- rejected.
02. The petitioner was initially appointed by the respondent vide order dated 19.09.1979 on the post of Draftsman in the pay-scale of Rs.205-375, he joined the duties on 29.09.1979. Vide order dated 01.08.1986, the petitioner was declared permanent / confirmed on the post of Draftsman w.e.f. 01.04.1985. Vide order dated 10.02.2005, the petitioner was given the benefit of Krammonat pay-scale on the pay- scale of Rs.4000-6000 to Rs.5000-8000 w.e.f. 27.09.2003. In the said order the designation of the petitioner was mentioned as "Assistant Draftsman".
03. Thereafter, vide order dated 15.10.2010 the petitioner was given the higher pa-scale on completion of 10 years and 20 years of service, in this order also the designation of the petitioner is shown as "Assistant Draftsman". The petitioner submitted a representation to the respondents to treat him "Draftsmen" and grant the pay-scale of Rs.1600-2720 and revised the same with the benefit of Krammonati as well as higher pay- scale. Vide impugned orders dated 02.09.2011 and 22.10.2011 the respondents have rejected the representation by submitting that the petitioner is having the qualification of "Assistant Draftsman", in view of the rules called भौमिकी तथा खमिकिम संचाऱिाऱय िध्यप्रदे श तृतीय श्रेणी (मऱपिक वगीय तथा अमऱपिक वगीय) सेवा िें भरती मियि, 2004, (hereinafter referred as "Rules of 2004") therefore, he is "Assistant Draftsman" not "Draftsman" hence, this petition before this Court.
04. According to the respondents, in the aforesaid Rules of 2004, there are two posts i.e. "Draftsman" and "Assistant Draftsman" and for both posts different pay-scales and qualification are prescribed. The petitioner is having the qualification of Assistant Draftsman.
05. Being aggrieved by the aforesaid rejection of representation, the Signature Not Verified Signed by: DIVYANSH SHUKLA Signing time: 26-04-2024 18:49:35 -3- petitioner has filed the present petition before this Court on the ground that he was appointed as "Draftsman" therefore, he is being wrongly treated as Assistant Draftsman and has not been given the benefit of proper pay-scale of the said post. The petitioner is also alleging discrimination that Draftsman working in other Government departments are also having the same qualification and getting the benefit of pay-scale of Rs.1600-2720 of Draftsman.
06. The respondents have filed the reply by submitting that from the very beginning under the recruitment Rules of 2004, two posts of Draftsman were created, first post was of State level and second was of District level post. The post of State level Draftsman was carrying pay- scale of Rs.170-315 which was revised to Rs.5000-8000 and District cadre Draftsman post was carrying pay-scale of Rs.90- and it was revised to Rs.4000-6000. For the post of State level Draftsman the qualification was diploma from polytechnic and for district level post the qualification was training from ITI in civil. The petitioner was appointed to the post of Draftsman in District level as he is having ITI diploma certificate. He was initially appointed in a pay-scale of Rs.90- which was Rs.205-375 at the time of appointment, therefore, he was fixed in a pay-scale of Rs.4000-6000 after revision of pay-scale. After the new Rules of 2004 came into force, the post of Draftsman has been bifurcated into two post i.e. "Draftsman" and "Assistant Draftsman". District cadre post of Draftsman has been redesignated as Assistant Draftsman and State level post of Draftsman has been designated as Draftsman with pay-scale of Rs.4000-6000 and Rs.5000-8000 respectively. Since the petitioner is having the qualification of Assistant Draftsman, therefore, he is rightly getting the pay-scale of Rs.4000- 5000. Hence, this petition is misconceived and liable to be dismissed.
07. By way of rejoinder the petitioner is contending that he ought to Signature Not Verified Signed by: DIVYANSH SHUKLA Signing time: 26-04-2024 18:49:35 -4- have been appointed in a pay-scale of Rs.280-480 vide order dated 19.09.1979. There is no provision in the Rules of 2004 for converting the post of Draftsman into the Assistant Draftsman which is contrary to F.R. 15. The petitioner cannot be demoted after 25 years of service to the post of Assistant Draftsman. The respondents filed the additional reply to the rejoinder by submitting that in the year 1979 the petitioner was appointed to the post of Draftsman in District Office as per the qualification which is provided in gazette notification dated 20.05.1966. In the recruitment rule applicable at the relevant point of time, there were two types of sanctioned posts of Draftsman one for State cadre carrying pay-scale of Rs.170-315 and second for Collector Office District cadre pay-scale of Rs.90- and qualification for both the posts is different.
I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
08. There is no dispute about the educational qualification of the petitioner as he possesses certificate course from ITI. At the time of appointment, the Rules in the name of िध्यप्रदे श तृतीय श्रेणी ( मऱपिक वगीय तथा अमऱपिक वगीय) सेवा िें भरती मियि, 1965 (hereinafter referred as "Rules of 1965") were applicable in which two level post of Draftsman were there. Both the posts were class-III post but carrying different pay-scales. Only 4 posts of Draftsman (pay-scale of Rs.170-
315) and 43 posts of Assisatnt Draftsman (pay scale of Rs.90-) for district cadre post were sanctioned in the Rules of 1965. Vide order dated 19.09.1989 the petitioner was appointed as Draftsman for District office in a pay-scale of Rs.205-375 which is a revised pay-scale of Rs.90-. At that time the designation was only Draftsman.
09. Thereafter, new rules came into force in the name of भौमिकी Signature Not Verified Signed by: DIVYANSH SHUKLA Signing time: 26-04-2024 18:49:35 -5- तथा खमिकिम संचाऱिाऱय िध्यप्रदे श तृतीय श्रेणी ( मऱपिक वगीय तथा अमऱपिक वगीय) सेवा िें भरती मियि, 2004 by publishing in gazette notification dated 22.07.2004 in which the post of Draftsman were converted into two posts i.e. Draftsman and Assistant Draftsman with different qualifications and different pay-scales. As per the qualification and pay-scale at the time of appointment the petitioner was rightly declared "Assistant Draftsman" which is evident from the order dated 10.02.2005 whereby the Krammonat pay-scale was given to the petitioner. At that time the petitioner did not object bout his designation. Thereafter, vide order dated 15.10.2010 the higher pay-scale after completion of 10 and 20 years of service in which also the petitioner's designation was mentioned as Assistant Draftsman and even at that time the petitioner did not object. Therefore, there is no such demotion of the petitioner with change of post from "Draftsman" to "Assistant Draftsman". As per new Rules of 2004 the post of "Draftsman" lower pay-scale of district cadre has been re-designated as "Assistant Draftsman" and accordingly the petitioner has been designated as Assistant Draftsman and the correct pay-scale was granted to him. Hence, the claim of the petitioner for the pay-scale of Draftsman is not tenable. The respondents have rightly rejected the representation of the petitioner.
10. In view of the above, this Writ Petition stands dismissed.
No order as to cost.
(VIVEK RUSIA) JUDGE Divyansh Signature Not Verified Signed by: DIVYANSH SHUKLA Signing time: 26-04-2024 18:49:35