- (1.) BEING aggrieved and feeling dissatisfied by an order passed by respondent no. 7 dated 19th September, 2002 (at Annexure -7), the petitioner has preferred this petition mainly for the reason that after lapse of approximately two decades, the benefit, which was given of the scale of Intermediate Trained Scale, is withdrawn by the impugned order. The benefit of Intermediate Trained Scale was given on 19th November, 1987 (vide letter at Annexure -5), with effect from 1st April, 1981. Thus, a benefit which was given in the year 1987, is withdrawn by order dated 19th September, 2002. It is also submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that without giving any notice and without giving any opportunity of being heard to the petitioners, an order at Annexure -7 has been passed by respondent no. 7. It is also submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that initially the petitioners were appointed as Assistant Teacher with effect from 12th August, 1978; thereafter, Intermediate Trained Scale was given in 1987 with effect from 1981; thereafter, petitioners worked for several years on the said post with the Intermediate Trained Scale and not on a single occasion, any grievance was ventilated by any of the respondents. For the first time, in the year 2002, allegations were levelled that the scale was wrongly given and unilaterally, arbitrarily and without giving any opportunity of being heard to the petitioners, the benefit which was given in the year, 1987 of Intermediate Trained Scale has been withdrawn and therefore, the order at Annexure -7 is passed in gross violation of principles of natural justice and therefore, the same deserves to be quashed and set aside. Had an opportunity of being heard been given to the petitioners they would have pointed out to the respondents that there was no mistake or illegality or irregularity in grant of Intermediate Trained Scale to the petitioners, but, directly an order has been passed without giving any opportunity of being heard to the petitioners and therefore, the present petition has been preferred. Learned counsel for the petitioners has also drawn attention of this Court to various affidavits filed by the respondents including one which is filed by the respondent no.6, which is in favour of the present petitioners.
(2.) I have heard learned counsel for the respondents, who has submitted that wrongly given benefit cannot be continued to be retained by the petitioners and therefore, the same is withdrawn vide order dated 19th September, 2002 at Annexure -7. It is also submitted by the learned counsel for the respondents that petitioners were not entitled for Intermediate Trained Scale and therefore, for the reasons stated in the impugned order at Annexure -7, the said Intermediate Trained Scale benefit has been withdrawn and therefore, the present petition deserves to be dismissed. Having heard learned counsels for both the sides and looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, I hereby quash and set aside the order passed by respondent no. 7 dated 19th September, 2002 at Annexure -7 to the memo of the petition, for the following facts and reasons: - (i) it appears that the present petitioners were appointed as a Teacher in the year 1978 and 1979 thereafter, they were given Intermediate Trained Scale vide order at Annexure -5 dated 19th November, 1987 with retrospective effect i.e. with effect from 1st April, 1981. (ii) It also appears that thereafter, the present petitioners have worked on the said posts on the same scale for much longer period to the satisfaction of the respondents. Never any notice, never any memo, never any departmental proceedings have been issued or initiated against the present petitioners. Spotless are the careers of the present petitioners. (iii) it appears that abruptly an order has been passed at Annexure 7 by respondent no. 7 dated 19th September, 2002 that the Intermediate Trained Scale was wrongly given in the year 1987. There are certain reasons stated in the impugned order, but, it appears that no notice, no hearing was ever given to the petitioners, prior to passing the order at Annexure -7. Once, there is a benefit accrued in favour of the petitioners or if there is any vested right in the petitioners which is to be taken away, subsequently, at least principles of natural justice ought to have been followed. The respondent no. 7 could have issued a notice and could have waited for a couple of days more before passing an order at Annexure -7. Had an opportunity of being heard been given to the petitioners, they would have pointed out the correct facts in their favour. It is admitted fact that no hearing was given to the petitioners nor any notice was given to the petitioners. (iv) Learned counsel for the petitioners has also relied upon the following decisions and submitted that the benefit which is given of a higher pay scale of Intermediate Trained Scale cannot be withdrawn after such a long lapse of time: - (i) in a case of Papsu Road Transport Corporation V/s. Lachhman Das Gupta and others as reported in 2001(2)JCR 467 (SC), (ii) in a case of Teres Ekka V/s State of Jharkhand and Ors. as reported in 2007 (2)JLJR 41, and (iii) Nar Singh Pal V/s. Union of India and others as reported in 2000 (3) SCC 588. In view of these decisions also, the order passed at Annexure -7, deserves to be quashed and set aside.
(3.) AS a cumulative effect of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, I hereby quash and set aside the order passed by respondent no. 7 dated 19th September, 2002 at Annexure -7 to the memo of the present petition. Accordingly, the petition is allowed to the aforesaid extent.;