JUDGEMENT
-
(1.) Respondents above named, fifty-one in number were working as Pharmacist
under the Health Department of the State. They were all having diploma in
Pharmacy from recognized Institute. The dispute arose as to whether the
Pharmacists having appropriate diploma from recognised Institute could be
given a better pay scale than their colleagues having no diploma in Pharmacy.
The issue stood resolved when the Government issued a notification dated
April 25, 1977 extending the benefit of Special Pay of rupees thirty to the
diploma holder Pharmacists by such benefit. The Pharmacists having
diploma was granted a Special Pay of rupees thirty. Such circular was issued
to resolve a controversy between the Pharmacists holding diploma and the
Pharmacist without holding diploma that resulted in litigation. The
Government rejected the claim of the diploma holders for a separate scale
and satisfied them with a Special Pay of rupees thirty. Accordingly, the issue
stood resolved for the time being.
(2.) In 1981, the State by introduction of ROPA 1981 abolished all Special Pay
that gave rise to another unrest. The diploma holders approached the Court
through C.R. No.1725(W) of 1955 in C.O. No.10802(W) of 1984. The learned
single Judge vide order dated July 20, 1989 directed the State to extend
benefit of scale of Rs.360-815/- for the diploma holders with effect from
January 1, 1986. The corresponding scale on the basis of the third Pay
Commission Report was also asked to be extended to them for the
subsequent period. The Assistant Secretary, Health Department accordingly
issued a circular dated July 28, 1992 observing that all Pharmacists of GradeIII and Grade-II having diploma would be placed in a single scale of Rs.360-
815/- with their existing post and to be treated as a dying cadre. It was also
observed that the Special Pay enjoyed by the diploma Pharmacist would not
be merged at the time of fixation under ROPA 1981 and would continue as
Special Pay separately. The diploma Pharmacists were given two additional
benefits. Their initial start would be at Rs.360/- in the basic scale of Rs.300-
685/- and would continue to get Special Pay separately at the rate of Rs.30/-.
Subsequently ROPA 1990 came into force, so was ROPA 1998. However,
Special Pay continued to remain. While implementing ROPA 1998 the
Finance Department issued a circular dated November 2, 1998 to the effect
that the Special Pay drawn by a government employee under Rule5(33) for
specific additional work or for other any specific reason would not be counted
for the purpose of fixation of their pay. To remove any confusion the
Department issued a clarification on August 5, 1999 appearing at page 59 of
the petition. On a combined reading of the said two circulars we would find
that the employees getting Special Pay as per Rule 5(33) would not be entitled
to have that merged for the purpose of fixation of pay, however would
continue to get such Special Pay as additional remuneration and such
additional remuneration would come under Rule 5(28). Such circular, in our
view, was in the line of the earlier circular dated July 28, 1992. By the
clarificatory circular through the Director, Health Service, such Special Pay
admissible to the Pharmacists holding diploma in Pharmacy, was directed not
be considered as pay and, therefore, could not be doubled to Rs.60/- from
Rs.30/- under ROPA 1990 and the excess amount was directed to be
recovered from them. By way of further clarification, it was made clear that
such Special Pay could not be merged with unrevised pay, to be considered as
an additional remuneration.
(3.) In this backdrop, the respondents approached the Tribunal by filing O.A.
No.1335 of 2001 challenging the order dated November 2, 1998 and August 5,
1999 and consequential relief therefor. The Tribunal, vide judgment and
order dated February 26, 2009, decided the issue.;
Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.