TARUN AGARWALA, J. - (1.) In this group of writ petitions, the petitioners have challenged the order dated 10.03.2011 by which the Director, Ayurvedic Services, U.P. Lucknow (hereinafter referred to as 'the Director') has withdrawn the recommendation granted by the Committee giving promotional pay scale. For facility, the facts of writ petition no. 29360 of 2011 filed by Pradeshik Chikitsa Avam Samudayik Sewa Sangh is taken into consideration. The petitioners in Writ Petition no. 67496 of 2011 have also challenged the Government Order dated 15.11.2011, by which the State Government has withdrawn the earlier Government Order dated 18.06.2010.
(2.) The Union of doctors contends that it's members were appointed as Medical Officer (Community Health) under the Director of Ayurvedic Services, U.P.Lucknow on ad -hoc basis in the year 1986 and are posted at various Primary Health Centres in various districts of State of Uttar Pradesh. It is contended that the services of the doctors are governed by the provisions of Uttar Pradesh State Medical and Community Health (Group 'A' and 'B') Service Rules, 2003, in which the appointing authority is the Governor of Uttar Pradesh. Subsequently, their services were regularised under the provision of U.P. Regularization of Ad -hoc Appointments(On the Post Within The Purview of Public Service Commission) Rules, 1979 as amended from time to time. Pursuant to the recommendation of the 5th Pay Commission, the State Government issued a Government Order dated 03.06.1989 providing promotional pay scale without actual promotion to avoid stagnation of the employees upon completion of 08 years, 14 years and 19 years of service. Upon completion of 08 years, the first promotional pay scale was granted. Subsequently, the Director by a letter dated 31.08.2009, addressed to the State Government made a request for releasing the second promotional pay scale to the doctors upon completion of 14 years of service. At this stage, a dispute arose as to whether ad -hoc period would be counted for the purpose of releasing the promotional pay scale. This controversy was settled by the State Government by issuance of a Government Order dated 05.02.1998. Subsequently, by a Government Order dated 18.06.2010, the State Government clarified that the services of the doctors on ad -hoc basis would be counted for providing the benefit of promotional pay scale after completion of 08 years, 14 years and 19 years but the said benefit would be released only after the Medical Officers are regularised on their post (s).
(3.) Pursuant to the 6th Pay Commission, a new scheme of promotional benefit on personal basis was introduced known as Assured Career Progressive Scheme (ACP). The State Government in order to implement the ACP, issued a Government Order dated 05.11.2009 but the same was cancelled and a fresh Government Order was issued on 04.05.2010, which provided that the new scheme of ACP would be applicable from 01.12.2008. Under this scheme, the promotional benefit was to be given upon completion of 10 years, 18 years and 26 years of service. Under this Government Order dated 04.05.2010, a Committee was to be constituted by the Director, Ayurvedic Services and this Committee was to make recommendations to the competent authority or the authority competent to sanction financial up gradation. The recommendations were required to be accepted by the appropriate authority or the accepting authority. Based on this Government Order dated 04.05.2010, the Director constituted a Committee. This Committee made certain recommendations, which were accepted by the Director and the third promotional scale, upon completion of 26 years of service, was released. The members of the petitioners' Sangh started enjoying the benefits. The petitioners contend that the Director by an order dated 05.01.2011 for reasons best known to him dissolved the Committee on the ground that it was not functioning properly and subsequently, by another order dated 10.03.2011 withdrew the recommendation issued by this Committee on the sole ground that the Committee was not functioning properly. The Sangh and other members, being aggrieved by the withdrawal of the recommendation that had already been implemented, has filed the present writ petition.;