Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

3) Petitioner was promoted to the post of Stenographer in the pay scale of 1400-2600 w.e.f. 01.06.1995 and transferred to the office of Superintending Engineer, U.P. Laghu Jal Vidyut Nigam Limited, Dehradun on probation for a period of one year. The educational qualification for appointment on the post of Stenographer Grade III, by direct recruitment, in UPLJVNL is Intermediate. The petitioner was promoted on the post of Stenographer in his earlier department w.e.f. 01.06.1995, after completing 9 years of service in the pay scale of 1400-2600 (revised pay scale Rs.5000-8000). The pay scale of Stenographer II is Rs.4500-7500 in UPLJVNL, which means that the petitioner is having the higher pay scale then the Stenographer II.

4) It is averred in the writ petition that there are three cadre posts in Stenographer cadre in U.P. Power Corporation. The same are as under:

                       Post               Pay scale w.e.f. 14.01.2000
              Stenographer Grade 3              Rs. 4200-6400
              Stenographer Grade 2              Rs.4500-7500
              Stenographer Grade 3              Rs. 5300-8600

In the earlier department of the petitioner the post structure in stenographer cadre is as follows:

8) The case of the petitioner is that after completing 7 years of service in the cadre of Stenographer, which is equivalent to Stenographer II, the petitioner was promoted to the post of Stenographer Grade I on 29.10.2002, vide Office Order no. 1144-

G-M dated 08.11.2002 and allowed the revised pay scale of Stenographer Grade I, i.e., 5300-150-8600. On coming to know of said fact, Subhash Chander Sarpal, Guru Bachan Singh and Krishan Gopal Gandhi (non-respondents), who were Stenographer Grade II in the pay scale of Rs. 4500-7500, have made a representation dated 07.04.2003 to the effect that petitioner is getting higher pay scale and claimed parity with the petitioner on the ground of their appointment.

27) The respondent authorities have totally failed to take into consideration the decision taken by the U.P. Jal Vidyut Nigam Ltd. in its Board meeting dated 06.08.2002 to the effect that the personnel who were allocated Uttarakhand Jal Vidyut Nigam Ltd. have been transferred and to be treated as they were working with U.P. Jal Vidyut Nigam Ltd. and Uttarakhand Jal Vidyut Nigam Ltd. has no power to convert their service conditions, pay scale or grading. Respondent have also failed to consider the report submitted by the committee on 01.08.2008, wherein it has opined that the pay scale which has been drawn by the petitioner is higher than the pay scale of Stenographer Grade II in U.P.S.E.B. It is also an admitted fact that the respondents have approved the pay scale and grade of the petitioner on 08.11.2002, hence the seniority of the petitioner could not be fixed with the persons of lower grade, i.e., Stenographer Grade II and his seniority shall be recounted in the cadre of Stenographer Grade I from the date of his absorption as Stenographer Grade I. It is not the case of respondents that the petitioner has placed wrong facts on record for getting his earlier promotion and in fixation of his salary. Some of the stenographers have been conferred designation of Stenographer Grade I on the ground of parity of scale drawn by the petitioner much later, inasmuch as the petitioner was already working as Stenographer Grade I, ignoring the claim of the petitioner for the next promotion and others have been promoted twice since then. This act on the part of the respondent authority amounts to infringement of the fundamental right of the petitioner, i.e., right of equality. Such an act of respondents is arbitrary, unfair, biased and unconstitutional.