Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 9 of 9 (0.21 seconds)Section 4 in West Bengal Municipal Act, 1993 [Entire Act]
Section 3 in West Bengal Municipal Act, 1993 [Entire Act]
State Of West Bengal And Ors. Etc vs Debdas Kumar And Ors. Etc on 19 February, 1991
28. Therefore, after meticulously considering the records and the
Hon'ble Apex Court decisions as cited above by the learned Advocates in
State of West Bengal And Others vs Debdas Kumar case (supra), State of
Orissa case (supra) , S.C. Chandra case (supra) & Government of West
Bengal vs Tarun K. Roy case (supra) I am of the view that since the
petitioner process the same qualification at per with his counterpart i.e.
Sub Assistant Engineers and is also performing the same nature of work
as Sub Assistant Engineers and not only that by virtue of the notification
being no 265-MA dated 30th June, 2009 as well as subsequent memo no.
2539 dated 18th August, 2009 and memo no.2751-2752 dated 24th
October, 2011 the Government has already revised the pay scale of all
the Sub Assistant Engineers of the ULBs from scale no.9 to scale no.11
with notional effect from 1st January, 1996. Therefore, the petitioner is
also entitled to enjoy the same benefit like his counterpart thereby
upgrading the his pay scale from scale no.9 to scale no.11 with notional
fixation from 1st January, 1996.
Government Of West Bengal vs Tarun K. Roy And Ors on 18 November, 2003
The other cited decision in Government of West Bengal case
(supra) is also not applicable in the case in hand. In that case the
respondent was not having the equal qualification of his counterpart but
in the present case the petitioner is having the equal qualification like his
counterpart as Sub Assistant Engineers and he is also performing equal
nature of work like Sub Assistant Engineers and further by virtue of
notification dated 30th June, 2009 the other ULBs have already been
granted the same benefit thereby enhancing their pay scale to scale no.9
to scale no.11 with notional effect from 1.1.1996 which has not been
granted to the petitioner.
Article 309 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
S.C.Chandra & Ors vs State Of Jharkhand & Ors on 21 August, 2007
In respect of S.C. Chandra & Others case (supra) the fact of the said
cited case and the fact of the present case is totally different. In the
present case it is not disputed that the petitioner is having the equal
qualification as that of the Sub Assistant Engineer and it is also not
disputed that the petitioner has been discharging the same nature of
work as that of the Sub Assistant Engineer but the Sub Assistant
Engineers of the ULBs vide the said notification dated 30th June, 2009
have been enjoying the benefit and the petitioner has been deprived of
the same. So the cited decision is not applicable in the present case in
hand.
State Of Orissa & Anr vs Mamata Mohanty on 9 February, 2011
28. Therefore, after meticulously considering the records and the
Hon'ble Apex Court decisions as cited above by the learned Advocates in
State of West Bengal And Others vs Debdas Kumar case (supra), State of
Orissa case (supra) , S.C. Chandra case (supra) & Government of West
Bengal vs Tarun K. Roy case (supra) I am of the view that since the
petitioner process the same qualification at per with his counterpart i.e.
Sub Assistant Engineers and is also performing the same nature of work
as Sub Assistant Engineers and not only that by virtue of the notification
being no 265-MA dated 30th June, 2009 as well as subsequent memo no.
2539 dated 18th August, 2009 and memo no.2751-2752 dated 24th
October, 2011 the Government has already revised the pay scale of all
the Sub Assistant Engineers of the ULBs from scale no.9 to scale no.11
with notional effect from 1st January, 1996. Therefore, the petitioner is
also entitled to enjoy the same benefit like his counterpart thereby
upgrading the his pay scale from scale no.9 to scale no.11 with notional
fixation from 1st January, 1996.
Section 53 in West Bengal Municipal Act, 1993 [Entire Act]
1