- (1.) Heard the learned Counsel for the parties.
(2.) The grievance of the petitioners in this writ application is against the refusal of the Respondents to treat the petitioners in the general cadre of Assistants and to extend the consequential benefits thereof in the matter of granting equal pay-scales pursuant to the pay Revision and pursuant to the fixation of the pay-scale after the grant of the A.C.P. benefits.
(3.) It appears that in response to a common advertisement dated-23.04.1981, issued by the Labour, Employment & Training Department in the district of Dhanbad, applications were invited from the eligible candidates in the General category for filling up 30 vacant posts of Assistants. In response, the petitioners had applied. After completing the selection process, a common select list was prepared in which the names of the petitioners and those of the private. Respondents being the selected candidates, were published. The advertisement, against which the applications were invited had declared that the pay-scale as stipulated in the advertisement, would be applicable to the candidates. On their selection, a common appointment letter dated-19th August, 1981 was issued, and the selected candidates were thereafter posted in the several Departments, some in the District Collectorate and some candidates like the petitioners in the Welfare Department and some in the District Social Security Department of the Districts and some in other Departments in the same district. It appears that after the appointment made, a distinction was sought to be drawn between the appointed candidates in as much as, by carving out the different cadres for some of them, the scales stipulated in the advertisement was offered to them while to the others, a lower pay-scale was offered. It further appears that under similar situations, some of the selected candidates who were selected and appointed in the Giridih Collectorate, had filed a writ application vide C.W.J.C. No. 169 of 1991 (R). The said writ application was disposed of declaring that in view of the fact that the same selection process was adopted and under the same panel, the writ petitioners and the other appointed candidates were appointed and since the advertisement had declared that the pay-scales against which the candidates had applied, would be applicable to them on their selection, the Respondents-authorities cannot make any discrimination between the appointees, by paying a lower pay-scale to some of the candidates and higher pay-scales to the others. Consequent upon the order passed in the aforesaid writ application, the concerned authorities of the State Government in the concerned District, had regularized the pay-scales of all the appointed candidates. It further appears that while the issues were finally resolved, a fresh controversy arose at the time of extending the benefits of the first A.C.P. to the candidates who had acquired the eligibility for the same, on the plea that the Finance Department has fixed the lower pay-scales for the Accounts Clerk working in the Social Security Department and a higher pay-scales for the Assistants working in the District Collectorate. The revised pay-scales upon grant of A.C.P. benefits has been fixed for the petitioners working in the Social Security Department, at a lower scale, whereas for those working in the District Collectorate, the higher scale. From perusal of the counter affidavit of the Respondents, it appears that while taking the aforesaid stand regarding the Finance Department's Resolution, fixing the different pay-scales of the appointees, a further ground has been taken that such Resolution having been issued by the Finance Department of the State Government in the year 2002 and was never challenged by any of the aggrieved petitioners.;