- (1.) The petitioners have challenged the order dated 3rd February, 2003 whereby they have been absorbed on the post of Lab Technician/Lab Assistant and have prayed for direction to the respondents to absorb them on the post equivalent to the post held by him or to their being declared surplus. They hive also prayed for further direction to the respondents to protect their present pay scale and grant them selection grade from the date they completed nine years.
(2.) The background facts giving rise to these writ petitions are that petitioners were appointed as Junior Mechanic (Electrical) in the service of the respondents by order dated 29th December, 1986 in the pay scale of Rs. 610-1090. They were later promoted to the post of Technical Assistant in the pay scale of Rs. 2000-3200 by order dated 12th January, 1992. The pay scale of the petitioners when they filed these writ petitions was Rs. 6500-10500. Suddenly, the respondents have passed an order on 3rd February, 2003 whereby they were informed that Academic Council of the University in its meeting dated 12th August, 2002 while accepting recommendation of the Advisory Committee decided to close down the Workshop in U.S.I.C. and Geology Department in the Science College of the University. As a consequence of closure thereof, the employees working in the said Workshop would stand declared surplus. University Authorities therefore required the petitioners to submit their option for accepting the alternative post of Lab Assistant/Lab Technician on which their services would be absorbed within a period of 15 days. In the event of their accepting offer, their present pay and allowances would be protected. According to the petitioners, eight persons in all were declared surplus from the said workshop. While all others have been absorbed on the equivalent post held by them, but the petitioners have been singled out for being absorbed on the lower post. The petitioners then submitted representation to the respondents on 7th February, 2003 requesting that they should be absorbed on the equivalent post which is commensurate to their qualification. The Registrar of the University again on 7th February, 2003 required the petitioners to positively give their option within stipulated time. It is in this background that the present writ petitions have been filed with the prayers extracted above.
(3.) The respondents have contested the writ petitions and filed reply thereto. They have contended that the petitioners were promoted from the post of Junior Mechanic to the post of Technical Assistant in the grade of Rs. 2000-3200 but such promotion was neither substantive nor permanent in nature and they could be posted to their substantive and original post as and when need arose. The post of Technical Assistant was abolished on account of the closure of the Workshop and all those working in that Workshop were declared surplus. It was therefore that an alternative employment on the post of Lab Assistant/Lab Technician was provided to the petitioners on which they were to be absorbed. The communication requiring the petitioners to give their option also categorically stated that in the event of their not accepting the proposed absorption, they would be retired with compensatory pension. It was open to the petitioners to get relieved from service with compensatory pension. The respondents have submitted that although the pay scales for the post of Technical Assistant and Section Officer in the university are same but these posts are neither inter-changeable nor of technical nature. The post of Section Officer is a promotion post in the ministerial staff where the clerical staff rising from the post of LDC after gaining various promotions eventually is promoted to the post of Section Officer. A Technical Assistant cannot properly and efficiently discharge the duties and functions on the post of Section Officer where he has to have experience of ministerial side while working on the various posts such as LDC, UDC, Office Assistant etc. A meeting of the Advisory Committee of University was convened on 19th June, 2002 in which viability and operation of USIC was discussed. It was unanimously recommended that this was a very little productive unit and it may be wound up and all employees be declared surplus. Thereafter Council of Deans in its meeting held on 24th June, 2002 approved recommendation of the Advisory Committee. Official decision was then taken by the Committee appointed by Advisory Committee of USIC in its meeting held on 16th December, 2002. Proceedings of all these meetings have been placed on record with the reply to the writ petition. The Committee in its meeting referred to above unanimously resolved to transfer the petitioner to the vacant post of Lab Assistant/Lab Technician. It is therefore prayed that the writ petition be dismissed.;