JUDGEMENT
-
(1.) PETITIONERS were appointed as Storekeeper cum account clerks in the Carpet Weaving Training Centres run by the All India Handicrafts Board in
the pay scale of 260 -400 in the year 1978 were made quasi permanent with
effect from 10 -3 -1981 In each of the Carpet Weaving Training Centre their
is post Carpet Training Officer carrying the pay scale of 550 -800.
Petitioners claim to be eligible and entitles for the appointment to the
said post. There are job issued by respondent No. 2 and in the said job
charts which a annexure -I and II functions of Carpet Training Officers in
respect of training centres are given and functions of sterekeeper - cum
- acconnt clerk are also given and they are assigned job which is to be
performed by them right from their, tenure of posting at a particular
center. The job chart is given in pursuance of the circutar issued by the
respondents, in respec, of the petitioners, it is sa,d that they will
dish functions of Carpet Training Officers in the centres bee use het
llTs are not provided with the said officers. It is stated that pe it one
s are storekeeper - cum -accounts clerks, but, by virtue of job chart
thyae infact discharging the functions of Carpet Training Officers
because It heir centres no Carpet Training officer was posted. The
directions contamed in anr -exures which are job charts tnerefore require
the pert oners" to work as Carpet Training Officers, but despite this
they are pa d LTe !m the pay scale ot 260 -400 though they are entitled to
get pay s 2 m the grade of 550 -800. The petitioners claim that despite
their representations for higher pay,the respondents have not paid any
heed to their demand and on the basis of equal pay for equal work they
claim pay scale of Carpet Training Officers for they d.scharge the job ot
Carpet Training Officers at various centres.
(2.) REPLY was filed by one Sona Ullah, SPecial officer office of the Development Commissioner (Handicarfts) Ministry of Commerce
Government of India, Filed Administrative cell. Baghat, Barzalla Sgr. The
petitioners claim to get pay in the grade of 550 -803 is denied. It is
stated that by being at different carpet training centres they would not
be entitled to be called as Carpet Training Officers nor would they be
entitled to get the pay as Carpet Training Officers merely because the
job chart entitles them to discharge the functions of the Carpet Training
Officers temporarily. Minimum qualification for a Carpet Training Officer
is said to be the degree of graduation from a recognized university and
knowledge of carpet industry experience of Handicarfts and small scab
industries, whereas for storekeeper - cum -accounts clerk one is to be
only a matriculate with knowledge of typing at the speed of 30 words P.
M. Petitioners are said to have been appointed as storekeepers cum -
accounts clerks in a particular pay scale, therefore by they cannot claim
to be Carpet Training Officers for which they are not eligible. However
tne job chart appended to the petition is to avoid adrrinistrative
inconvenience and overlapping of responsibilities of various officers and
was issued in the nature of administrative instructions. It gives only
mode of functioning of various officers in accordance with the policy
laid down and this would not confer any right on the petitioners to get
pay scale of Carpet Training Officers. The petitioners are said to be not
eligible for holding the posts of Carpet Trainng Officers but for
administrative convenience they may have been put in charge of centres as
Carpet Training Officer.
(3.) CIRCULAR dated 20 -11 -1982 is relied for the purpose of grant of equal pay for equal work by the petitioners and their contention is that
the respondents, by giving them a particular job which they are asked to
do. This argument is based on the concept of equal pay for equal work and
Randhir Singhs case is relied upon by the petitioners. Condition No. 22
in annexuxe II reads as under"In respect of the training centres which
are not provided with Carpet Training Officers the storekeeper - cum -
accounts clerks shall have to carry out all the function which are given
in the job chart of the carpet training officers.
This clause is relied upon by the petitioners to indicate that where there are no Carpet Training Officers the petitioners who are
storekeeper - cum - account clerks have to perform the same duty which is
assigned to the Carpet Training Officer wherever they are placed.;
Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.