BIJAY KUMAR SHARMA & ORS. versus RANCHI UNIVERSITY & ORS.

Citation: [2021] 7 S.C.R. 250 · Decided: 17-03-2021 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: SANJAY KISHAN KAUL · Disposal: Dismissed

cites 2 · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
250
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2021] 7 S.C.R.
BIJAY KUMAR SHARMA & ORS.
v.
RANCHI UNIVERSITY & ORS.
(Civil Appeal No. 2822 of 2012)
MARCH 17, 2021
[SANJAY KISHAN KAUL AND R. SUBHASH REDDY, JJ.]
Service Law – Merger of pay scales – Permissibility – D.O.
letter dated 28.07.1981 of the State Government provided for merger
of pay scales only of Lower Division and Upper Division Assistants/
Clerks in the Patna University – The merger was further extended
to other Universities of the erstwhile State of Bihar by a letter dated
27.01.1982 – Thereafter, a communication was issued on 05.10.1989
by which the State decided to implement the above-mentioned
integrated pay scale to all the class III employees of the colleges
affiliated to various Universities of the State – Pursuant thereto,
Vice-Chancellor of Ranchi University issued a circular to all the
affiliated colleges – Consequently, Principal of a college affiliated
to Ranchi University, granted such merger to the appellants subject
to approval of the University by order dated 03.08.1990 – The order
of the principal was reversed by University on 08.03.1995 – Writ
petition challenging order dated 08.03.1995 allowed by the Single
Judge of the High Court – The order of Single Judge of High Court
was set aside by Division Bench of the High Court – On appeal,
held: As per D.O. letter dated 28.07.1981, the category of posts
sought to be merged were only those which had two or more scales
of senior and junior incumbents – In the post in question, there is
no categorisation of lower division and senior division and the
appellants were appointed to sanctioned posts – They were neither
promoted nor appointed or regularized against the post of Lower
Division and Upper Division Assistants/Clerks – In absence of such
categories, the letter dated 28.07.1981 would not apply and there
cannot be a mandamus to merge pay scales – However, as regards,
the benefit to appellants from 1990 to 1995, the same is not liable to
be recovered.
[2021] 7 S.C.R. 250
250
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
251
Dismissing the appeal, the Court
Held: 1. The cause arose from D.O. letter No. 373 dated
28.07.1981. In matters which have financial implication so far as
the State or the employees are concerned, there must be a right
for it to be enforced for the employees. This Court is concerned
with merger of scales and if qua the appointments and qua the
post held by the appellants, a merger was not to take place, there
cannot be a mandamus to merge the pay scales. The D.O. itself
stated that only such of the category of posts as of two or more
scales of the senior and junior incumbents were sought to be
merged. In the absence of any such categories, there would be
no application of this D.O. This is apart from the fact that the pay
scales were also different from the post held by the appellants
which are of Typist, Counter Clerk, Routine clerk and Store
Keeper. [Para 17][261-F-H]
2. The denial of the claim by the University is predicated on
the plea that the appellants do not belong to the category of LD
Clerks/Assistants to the UD Clerks/Assistants in the given pay
scales. Last three posts in the colleges are of different designation
such as Headclerk, Accountant, Correspondent Clerk, Accounts
Clerk, Counter Clerk, Store Keeper etc. which in turn is based
on the number of students in an institution. It is a matter of the
staffing pattern for such appointments. In the post in question
there is no categorization of the post of Lower Division and Upper
Division and these appellants were appointed to sanctioned posts.
They were neither promoted nor appointed or regularized against
the post of Lower Division and Upper Division Assistants/Clerks.
[Para 18][262-A-C]
3. The principle of merger of pay scales is to bring uniformity
of pattern in grant of pay in pay scales. However, there can be
uniformity in respect of the posts for which such uniformity is
sought to be implemented and not in respect of any other post
which exists in category III. [Para 19][262-C-D]
4. The communication of the Registrar of the university vide
letter dated 25.04.1990 only sought w.e.f. to the Govt. letter dated
11.07.1989 by communicating it to the constituent colleges. It is
in the wisdom of the Principal of the Ranchi Women’s College
BIJAY KUMAR SHARMA v. RANCHI UNIVERSITY
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
252
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2021] 7 S.C.R.
that she issued letter dated 03.08.1990 but cautiously worded it
by stating that if University does not approve t

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.