S.N. Pathak, J. - (1.) The Petitioner has approached this court with a prayer for quashing the order, dated 29.06.2009 (Annexure-2) whereby the respondents have passed orders modifying the earlier order of appointment passed on 21.08.1985 for compassionate appointment in the pay scale of Rs. 730-1080 in place of Rs. 580-860. The petitioner is also aggrieved by the order passed by the respondents for recovery of excess payment made to her.
(2.) It is case of the petitioner that after death of her husband on 4th November, 1984, petitioner was appointed as an Assistant in the Ranchi Veterinary College of the Birsa Agricultural University on 21.08.1985 in the pay scale of Rs. 730-1080. Since thereafter, petitioner continued to work to the satisfaction of her superiors and is still working as per the revised pay scale and the recommendations adopted by the Birsa Agricultural University. The pay scale of the petitioner was revised from time-to-time. At present petitioner is receiving the pay scale of Rs. 5500-9000. It is specific case of the petitioner that suddenly on 29.06.2009 it was intimated to her that the appointment made to her under compassionate ground in the post of third grade in the year 1985 in the pay scale of 730-1080 was irregular as that should have been in the scale of Rs. 580-860 and on the basis of Audit (Finance) objection it was intimated that appointment letter issued to the petitioner vide Office Order No. 1122/R/BAU (VC) dated 21.08.1985 stands modified to the extent that the pay scale of the petitioner was reduced to the pay scale of Rs. 580-860.
(3.) It was also communicated by the said office order, dated 29.06.2009 that according to the corresponding revised rules, pay scale from 01.01.1986 and 01.01.1996 will be Rs. 1200-1800 and Rs. 4000-6000 respectively and further it was also intimated that excess payment made to her on this count from the year 1985 till 29.06.2009 shall be recovered in suitable installments. The petitioner though represented before the authorities regarding illegal recovery said to be done by the respondent-authorities, but no heed was paid to the same and as such the present writ petition has been preferred.;