- (1.) This Civil Review has been preferred for review of an order passed by this Court in L.P.A. No. 217 of 2009 dated 10th November, 2009 mainly on the ground that this petitioner (appellant of L.P.A. No. 217 of 2009) was appointed as Safety Officer with respondent nos. 4 and 5 in the year 1990 in the lower scale of pay. In fact, pay scale should have been either EI or EII, but, certainly not pay scale LVI mainly on the ground that this petitioner is a Safety Officer and as per Rule 62B (3) (c) of the Bihar Factories Rules, 1950, he should have been given pay scale of Executive. This aspect of the matter has not been properly appreciated by the Division Bench of this Court while dismissing the L.P.A. No. 217 of 2009. Learned counsel for the petitioner has also placed reliance upon the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court reported in AIR 1986 SC 1571.
(2.) Having heard learned counsels for both the sides and looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, we see no reason to entertain this Civil Review mainly for the reason that the learned Single Judge has observed in paragraph 7 of the order dated 20th March, 2009 passed in C.W.J.C. No. 2007 of 1994(P) with C.W.J.C. No. 10350 of 1996(P) as under: "7. From the rival submissions, the admitted facts which emerge, are as follows : (i) The petitioners were appointed some time in the year 1990 under the respondent BSL after inviting their names from the Employment Exchange. Such appointment was made by relaxing the qualification in respect of the experience, under exemption granted by the Chief Inspector of Factories under the provisions of Rule 62B of the Bihar Factory Rules. (ii) At the time of their appointment, the petitioners were designated as Factory Inspectors and their scale of pay was fixed at Rs. 1550531921602341/ which the petitioners had accepted and on revision with effect from 01.01.1992, it was fixed at Rs. 2390812957902587/. (iii) As per chart (Annexure3) submitted by the respondent BSL in respect of the pay structure of Executives under it, the scale of pay of executives of EII Grade prior to 01.01.1991 was Rs. 310013037501405150/ and upon revision with effect from 01.01.1991, it was fixed at Rs. 370014044001505990/. The above facts are undisputed. The contention of the petitioners that at the time of their initial appointment, their scale of pay was equivalent to that of the executives of EII Grade, does not appear to be correct."
(3.) In paragraph 4 of order dated 10th November, 2009 passed in L.P.A. No. 216 of 2009 with L.P.A. No. 217 of 2009, the Division Bench of this Court has appreciated the observation given by the learned Single Judge while dismissing the Letters Patent Appeals. Paragraph 4 of the said order reads as under: "4. Admittedly, the petitioners were appointed as Safety Inspector in the year 1990 in the pay scale of Rs. 15502341 and the scale of pay was mentioned in the appointment letter. The scale of pay on which the petitioners were appointed as Safety Inspector was of LVI grade. The petitionersrespondents joined in the said post in the same scale of pay without raising any objection whatsoever. The learned Single Judge found that at the time of initial appointment, the scale of pay of the petitioners were not equivalent to that of the Executives of EII grade. The learned Single Judge put reliance on the ratio decided by the Supreme Court in the case of B.H.E.L. and another Vs. B.K. Vijay, 2006 2 SCC 654 . We fully agree with the view taken by the learned Single Judge holding that the status for the purposes of rule under Factory Act does not automatically place the petitioners in the Senior Executive cadre.";