Madhya Pradesh High Court
Smt. Mangla Joshi vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh Thr on 5 September, 2019
Author: Gurpal Singh Ahluwalia
Bench: Gurpal Singh Ahluwalia
1
The High Court of Madhya Pradesh
WP 6949 of 2015 (S)
Smt. Mangla Joshi vs. State of MP and Others
Gwalior, dt. 05/09/2019
Shri DP Singh, Counsel for the petitioner.
Shri SN Seth,Government Advocate for the respondents No.1 & 2/State.
Shri Vinod Kumar Sharma, Counsel for the respondent No.3/ UGC. This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed challenging the order dated 12/08/2015 (Annexure P1) passed by the Director, Medial Education, MP, thereby rejecting the claim of the petitioner for grant of Selection Grade Pay-scale.
The necessary facts for disposal of the present petition in short are that the petitioner was initially appointed on the post of Cataloger vide order dated 28/02/1984 and thereafter, her appointment was regularized vide order dated 23/11/1989. The petitioner was promoted to the post of Librarian in the month of February, 1994. Since the Pay-scale as per UGC norms was not granted to the employees of the Departments of Medical Education, Technical Education and Higher Education, therefore, a petition was filed before the Court claiming ''equal pay for equal work'' with the employees of the College of General Education of Science, Arts and Commerce. The matter was finally disposed of by erstwhile State Administrative Tribunal by order dated 08/01/1995 passed in TA No.1310/1988. The order of the State Administrative Tribunal was challenged by the State Government by filing Writ Petitions 2 No.5438 of 2000, 2311 of 2000, 2313 of 2000 and 2039 of 1999. The said writ petitions were decided by a Division Bench of this Court by order dated 01/03/2002 and the order passed by the State Administrative Tribunal was upheld.
It is contended by the Counsel for the petitioner that the order of the Writ Court was challenged before the Supreme Court and the SLP was also dismissed. It is further submitted that in compliance of the order passed by the State Administrative Tribunal which was affirmed by the Supreme Court, the petitioner was granted UGC Pay-scale. It is submitted that as the petitioner was granted Senior Pay-Scale, therefore, after completing 16 years of service she was entitled for Selection Grade Pay-Scale and, therefore, she made a representation with request to extend the benefit with effect from Febrary, 2010. The representation made by the petitioner was recommended by the Dean by letter dated 05/08/2011 for extension of benefit and revision of pay, however, no decision was taken over the recommendation made by Dean. Therefore, the petitioner filed a petition before this Court which was registered as Writ Petition No.1978 of 2015 and the same was disposed of by order dated 01/04/2015 and the respondents were directed to decide the representation. When the respondents did not take any action, therefore, the petitioner filed a Contempt Petition. After receiving the notices of the Contempt Petition, the respondents have dismissed the claim of the petitioner by holding that since the petitioner is not holding the minimum qualification 3 as per UGC norms, therefore, she is not entitled for Selection Grade Pay- Scale. The representation of the petitioner has been rejected by the impugned order dated 12/08/2015 (Annexure P1), which is under challenge.
It is submitted by the Counsel for the petitioner that the employees, who were working in the Departments of Medical Education, Technical Education and Higher Education, were not granted UGC Pay-Scale, therefore, they had approached this Court by filing a writ petition which was transferred to the State Administrative Tribunal and the Transfer Application was allowed by order dated 08/01/1995 passed in TA No.1310 of 1988 and the said order was upheld by the High Court as well as the Supreme Court. Accordingly, in compliance of the order passed by the State Administrative Tribunal, the petitioner was granted UGC Pay-Scale. It is submitted that for grant of Selection Grade Pay-scale, the employees must have completed eight years of service in the Senior Scale and the condition of eight years of service shall be relaxed in the case of Officers who have completed at least 16 years and for Ph.D and M.Phil. holders 13 years and 15 years respectively of service on the post of Assistant Professor/Sports Officer/ Librarian. Since the petitioner has completed 16 years of service, therefore, she is entitled for Senior Grade Pay- scale.
Per contra, it is submitted by the Counsel for the State that the petitioner is not holding the minimum qualification as per the UGC norms. The UGC Pay-scale was given to the petitioner in compliance of the order 4 passed by State Administrative Tribunal only.
Heard the learned Counsel for the parties.
The State Administrative Tribunal while deciding TA No.1310 of 1988 has held as under:-
''The petitions are allowed, it is declared that all the petitioners and even those who are similarly placed like the petitioners in Engineering Colleges, Medical Colleges and the Colleges of Education are entitled to pay scales as recommended by the U.G.C. from time to time on same terms and conditions as have been allowed to the Librarians/ P.T.Is. Of the Colleges of General Education. It shall be the personal responsibility of the Principal Secretary of the Department in question and the Directors of concerned Colleges to implement the decision within four months of the passing of this order. The respondents shall also pay costs of Rs.1000/- in each petition.'' While allowing the Transfer Application,the State Administrative Tribunal had held that the State Government has treated the employees with hostile discrimination. The nature of duties and responsibilities in the Colleges of the petitioners therein and in the Colleges of General Education so far as the Librarians/PTIs are concerned, they are one and the same and more than twenty five years have passed since the implementation of revised Pay-scale for the Librarians/PTIs working in the Colleges of General Education and yet the State Government could not decide whether to implement the UGC Pay-scale in respect of the employees working in the Colleges under the Technical Education, Medical College and the College of Education and since the nature of duties and responsibilities were found to be similar, therefore, the State Government was directed to grant UGC Pay-scale to the employees working in the Engineering 5 Colleges, Medical Colleges and Colleges of Education.
The petitioner is undisputedly working in the Medical College on the post of Librarian. Once, the State Administrative Tribunal has held that the petitioner is entitled to pay scale as recommended by UGC from time to time, then the State Government cannot deny further benefit by saying that the UGC Pay-scale was granted in compliance of the order of State Administrative Tribunal only. Once the entitlement of the employees has been settled by the Court of law which has been upheld by the Supreme Court, then the State Government cannot deny the further benefit of UGC Pay-scale for no good reason.
In the return, it is submitted by the respondents that the initial appointment of the petitioner on the post of Cataloger was illegal.
Once the petitioner was granted appointment on the post of Cataloger and thereafter, she was promoted to the post of Librarian and she was also granted UGC Pay-scale, then now for the purpose of grant of Selection Grade Pay-scale, the State cannot say that her initial appointment on the post of Cataloger was illegal.
Accordingly, this Court is of the considered opinion that in the light of the order passed by the State Administrative Tribunal which was affirmed by this Court by order dated 01/03/2002 passed in Writ Petition No.5438 of 2000 as well as by the Supreme Court, the respondents cannot deny the Selection Grade Pay-scale to the petitioner, who has already completed 16 years of service.
Accordingly, the order dated 12/08/2015 (Annexure P1) passed by the Director, Medical Education, MP is hereby set aside. It is held that the petitioner 6 after completing 16 years of service, is entitled for grant of Selection Grade Pay- scale as per the UGC Guidelines. The arrears be paid within a period of six months from today, failing which the delayed payment shall carry interest @ 6% per annum.
With aforesaid observation, this petition is finally disposed of.
(G. S. Ahluwalia) Judge MKB MAHENDR Digitally signed by MAHENDRA KUMAR BARIK DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF M.P. BENCH GWALIOR, ou=P.S., A KUMAR postalCode=474011, st=Madhya Pradesh,
2.5.4.20=f592da990684fe30f8e1e29a4a BARIK 1a9e3451ee450d883083a8e4cc8020ee e6f7cb, cn=MAHENDRA KUMAR BARIK Date: 2019.09.16 17:58:41 +05'30'