Disposed

Biralal Doley v. the State of Assam and 3 Ors.

Gauhati HC17 May 2019WP(C)/6403/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Gauhati High Court admitted a writ petition regarding the petitioner's claim for AICTE scale of pay. Relying on a precedent where a similar claim was directed to the Higher Education Department, the court disposed of the petition by directing the Principal Secretary to consider the claim from the date of initial appointment.

What did the court decide?

Directed the Principal Secretary to the Higher Education Department to consider the claim for AICTE scale of pay within three months.

Biralal Doley Vs the State of Assam and 3 Ors. — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Gauhati HC (2019)

¶1

Page No.# 1/5

¶2

GAHC010012422013

¶3

THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

¶4

Case No. : WP(C) 6403/2013

¶5

1:BIRALAL DOLEY

¶6

S/O LT. JOYGU RAM DOLEY, PRESENTE ADDRESS- RESIDENTIAL CAMPUS PRINCE OF WALES INSTGITUTE JORHAT, P.O. and DIST- JORHAT, PIN785001, PERMANENT ADDRESS- VILL. TIKRAI, P.O. MERAMUKH, DISTLAKHIMPUR, ASSAM

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

1:THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 3 ORS

¶9

REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM, CTM AND HIGHER EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, DISPUR, GHY-6

¶10

2:THE DIRECTOR OF TECHNICAL EDUCATION ASSAM KAHILIPARA GHY-19

¶11

3:THE PRINCIPAL

¶12

THE PRINCE OF WALES INSTITUTE OF ENGINEERING and TECHNOLOGY JORHAT P.O. and DIST- JORHAT PIN-785001

¶13

4:THE COMMISSIONER and SECRETARY DEPTT. OF FINANCE GOVT.OF ASSAM DISPUR GHY-

¶14

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR.A R SIKDAR

¶15

Advocate for the Respondent : SC, EDU

¶16

Page No.# 2/5

¶17

BEFORE

¶18

HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KALYAN RAI SURANA

¶19

ORDER

¶20

Date : 17.05.2019

¶21

Heard Mr. A.R. Sikdar, learned counsel for the petitioner. None appears on call for the Higher Education Department, respondents No. 1 to 3 as well as for the Finance Department.

¶22

Owing to the nature of grievance raised in the present writ petition, this writ petition stands admitted for hearing by issuing rule, returnable forthwith.

¶23

By this writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the grievance of the petitioner is that he was initially appointed as Assistant Project Engineer on being duly selected and recommended by the APSC and posted at Silchar Polytechnic on recommendation made by the APSC vide order dated 25.03.1996. In course of time, the petitioner was transferred to Prince of Wales Institute, Jorhat and the service of the petitioner was adjusted from the post of Assistant Project Engineer to that of Lecturer of Mechanical Engineering Department at Prince and Wales Institute, Jorhat vide Government order No. TEC.64/95/242 dated 28.01.2013 and accordingly, the petitioner joined as Lecturer in Mechanical Engineering on 04.02.2013. Relying on the notification of 28.02.1987 issued by the Government, it is projected that the post of Asstt. Project Engineer is equivalent to the post of Lecturer in qualification having the same mode of recruitment as the case of Lecturer and by referring to the Assam Services (Revision of Pay) Rules, 1990, it is projected that the post of Asstt. Project Engineer was equivalent to Lecturer (Mechanical) of the Polytechnic and the post of Project Engineer is equivalent to the Head of the Department of Polytechnic.

¶24

Referring to the notification No. T.H. 73/2000/20 dated 08.06.2000, the learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the Govt. of Assam, Education (CTM) Department had granted AICTE scale of pay to the post of Training-cum- placement Officer/

¶25

Page No.# 3/5

¶26

Project Engineer of Polytechnic in Assam and accordingly, it is submitted that although the Head of Department was given the benefit of AICTE scale of pay, similar benefits were not extended to the petitioner. Accordingly, it is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner had moved the Commissioner and Secretary to the Govt. of Assam, Education (CTM) Department by submitting representations on 21.09.2000, 25.06.2004 and 25.04.2005. However, as the said benefit was not granted to the petitioner, present writ petition has been filed.

¶27

It is seen that as per affidavit-in-opposition filed by respondent No.2, the stand of the respondent is that the petitioner had claimed AICTE pay scale w.e.f. 08.04.1996 as Asstt. Project Engineer, but the post was created in the State scale of pay under World Bank Sponsored Community Polytechnic scheme and that later on, the Govt. of Assam in Technical Education Department abolished the post of Asstt. Project Engineer and adjusted them in the post of Lecturer under AICTE scale of pay per norms and the petitioner was adjusted as Lecturer under adjustment in Mechanical Engineering Department of Prince of Wales Institute, Jorhat and it is admitted that the petitioner joined there on 04.02.2013. It is further projected that the Officers holding post of Asstt. Project Engineer were directly appointed to the said post in the State scale of pay for which these category of officers could not be allowed to avail AICTE scale of pay in the post of Asstt. Project Engineer.

¶28

The learned counsel for the petitioner has referred to the judgment and order dated 06.02.2018 passed by this Court in WP(C) 7111/2013 (Bipul Dutta Vs. State of Assam and 3 Ors.). It is seen that in the said order the following directions were issued by this Court:

¶29

“6. Accordingly, when the notification of 02.02.1995 is read conjointly with the communication of 08.06.2000, it transpires that the Project Engineers are given the AICTE scale of pay of a HoD as because the Finance Department’s notification of 02.02.1995, which makes their scale of pay same as that of a HoD in a Polytechnic. But, a similar provision had not been made in the communication dated 08.06.2000 in respect of the Assistant Project Engineers. However, as the notification dated 02.02.1995 provides that the scale of pay of Assistant Project Engineer is same as that of a Lecturer (Technical) in a Polytechnic, therefore, a similar treatment was also required to have been considered for the Assistant Project Engineers in the Polytechnics. The same having not been done in the communication dated 08.06.2000, this Court is of the view that a similar consideration is also required to be given in respect of the Assistant Project Engineers.

¶30

Page No.# 4/5

¶31

Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of by directing the Principal Secretary to the Government of Assam in the Higher Education Department to give a consideration to the claim of the petitioner for an AICTE scale of pay applicable to a Lecturer (Technical) in the Polytechnics from the date of his initial appointment made in the year 1992 and pass a reasoned order thereof. In doing so, the Principal Secretary shall take note of the conclusion arrived in this order, meaning thereby that the notification of 02.02.1995 makes the scale of pay of Project Engineer same as that of HoD in a Polytechnic and by the communication of 08.06.2000, the AICTE scale of pay of HoD in the Polytechnic is made applicable in respect of the Project Engineers. By the same analogy, although the notification dated 02.02.1995 provides that the scale of pay of Assistant Project Engineers is same as that of Lecturer (Technical) of a Polytechnic, a similar consideration as the communication of 08.06.2000 be made also in respect of the Assistant Project Engineers.

¶32

The aforesaid exercise be done within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment an order.”

¶33

From the above quoted para of the order dated 06.02.2018, it appears that the petitioner in the said case is similarly situated to the writ petitioner herein and that the petitioner in WP(C) 7111/2013 was initially appointed Assistant Project Engineer in Dibrugarh Polytechnic at Lahowal and later on transferred and posted as a Lecturer in Mechanical Engineering in the Bongaigaon Polytechnic.

¶34

Having found that the petitioner is similarly situated to the writ petitioner in WP(C) 7111/2013, this Court is inclined to dispose of this writ petition with the similar direction to the Principal Secretary to the Govt. of Assam, Education (CTM) Department to give a consideration to the claim of the petitioner for an AICTE scale of pay applicable to a Lecturer (Technical) in the Polytechnics from the date of his initial appointment and pass a reasoned order thereof. In doing so, the Principal Secretary shall take note of hereinbefore quoted para 6 to 8 of the judgment and order dated 06.02.2018 passed by this Court in WP(C) 7111/2013 which is precisely the claim of the petitioner herein.

¶35

Accordingly, the said exercise shall be done within a period of 3(three) months from the date of receipt of the certified copy of this order together with a copy of the writ petition with all annexures.

¶36

With the aforesaid direction, this writ petition stands disposed of.

¶37

Page No.# 5/5

¶38

Accordingly, the rule is made absolute in terms of this order. Ordered accordingly.

¶39

No cost.

¶40

JUDGE

¶41

Comparing Assistant

Biralal Doley v. the State of Assam and 3 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Biralal Doley v. the State of Assam and 3 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Arup Kumar Das and 5 Ors. Vs the Union of India and 6 Ors.

Giridhar Barman and 2 Ors. Vs the State of Assam and 3 Ors.

Smt. Queen Devi Vs the State of Assam and Ors.

Md. Fayzul Islam Vs the State of Assam and 3 Ors.

Trailokya Nath Vs the State of Assam and 3 Ors.

Smti Phunu Rani Devi and 2 Ors. Vs L.S. Samchang and 2 Ors.