NARENDRA KUMAR Vs. STATE OF TRIPURA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners seek for a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to provide them the identical pay scale benefits of Diploma holder Overseers which have been allowed to the proforma- respondent Nos. 3 to 7.

(2.) The petitioner Nos. 1,2 and 3 passed the Diploma in Mechanical Engineering from Narsingarh Polytechnic Institute in the year 1964, 1965 and 1966 respectively while the petitioner No. 4 did the Diplomat in Electrical Engineering from the aforesaid Institute in 1966. The course of Diploma in Engineering was of three years duration. The petitioner No. 1 was appointed in the post of Instructor with a posting at Industrial Training Institute. Kailashahar, North Tripura in the year 1970 by the Director of Industries while the petitioner Nos. 2, 3 and 4 had also been appointed as Instructors in Aug. '73. Subsequently the petitioner No. 1 was promoted to the post of Foreman in 1980. After introduction of Revision of Pay Rules, 1988 (shortly ROP, 1988), the petitioner Nos. 2, 3 and 4 have been designated as Senior Instructors and the pay scale of Rs. 1450- 3710/- had been allowed to them whereas the petitioner Nos. 1 was given the pay scale of Rs.1700-3980/-in the post of Foreman. In the Directorate of Industries there are different posts having different nomenclature but having same and identical qualification and performing identical works. These are - Supervisor, Instructor, Store-keeper (Tech.), Manager-cum-Overseer, Estimator etc. The posts of Manager-cum-Overseer/Estimator/ Store-keeper (Tech) have been re-designated as Overseer (Industrial Estate) and Overseer (Store) and the posts of Supervisor and Instructor have been redesignated as Senior Supervisor, Senior Instructor etc. The pre- revised scale of pay prior to ROP, 1988 of all those posts was Rs.560-1300/-. but by virtue of ROP, 1988 the post of Store-Keeper (Tech) was redesignated as Overseer (Store) and the post of Manager-cum-Overseer was re-designated as Overseer (Industry) but for all those posts of pay scale was revised to Rs. 1450-3710/- and the pay scale of Foreman was revised to Rs.1700-3980/-. The pro-respondent No. 4 who was initially appointed as Store-keeper (Tech) having the qualification of Diploma in Engineering like the petitioners was allowed the pay scale of Rs.560-1300/-, but being aggrieved, he filed a suit being Title Suit No. 12 of 1994 before the learned Assistant District Judge, North Tripura, Kailashahar claiming the revised pay scale of Rs.1450-3710/-under ROP, 1988. Subsequently, the Government in the Finance Department decided to re-designate the post of Diploma holder Overseers as Junior Engineer Grade-I with a pay scale of Rs.2000-4410/- w.e.f 1.3.1996. The suit filed by the pro-respondent No. 4 was decreed by the learned. Add. Court vide judgment dated 27.6.1995. In that suit it was decided that the Diploma holder Engineers who had been working in various capacities with different designations were entitled to the benefit of pay scale of Junior Engineer Grade-I but since the petitioners have been holding the posts under the nomenclature Senior Instructor (not overseer), their designation remained unchanged having deprived of the higher pay scale benefit meant for Junior Engineers. The Junior Engineers (the erstwhile overseers) having completed 22 years service were automatically upgraded as Assistant Engineers in the pay scale of Rs.2100-5000/- w.e.f. the date of completion of 22 years continuous service. So, according to the petitioners, only due to the different nomenclatures/ designations of their posts they have been deprived of the benefit of pay parity though the petitioners have been performing identical duties with identical qualification comparable to the pro-respondent Nos. 3 to 7 and this is, according to the petition, violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India.

(3.) The respondents having filed counter- affidavit resisted the claim of the petitioners contending, inter alia, that notwithstanding the identical qualification of Diploma in Engineering the petitioners entered in service as Instructor subsequently re-designated as Senior Instructor by virtue of ROP, 1988 while the pro-respondents entered in service as Store-keeper (Tech) Manager-cum- Overseer, Estimator etc. and as such it cannot held that all performed/have been performing identical nature of work with identical responsibilities and as such they cannot claim the pay parity.