LexDIRECTOR, GENERAL RICE RESEARCH INSTITUTION, CUTTACK AND ANR. versus SHRI KHETRA MOHAN DAS
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
DIRECTOR, GENERAL RICE RESEARCH INSTITUTION, A CUTTACK AND ANR. v. SHRI KHETRA MOHAN DAS OCTOBER 6, 1994 (A.M. AHMADI, R.M. SAHA! AND K. JAYACHANDRA REDDY, JJ.] Service Law : .J.CA.R. Technical Service Rules-Rules 3.1., 5.1., 7.2, 8.1-Categories and Grades of service-Fitment of-Claim for fitment into higher category 011 the basis of qualification-Validity of-Subsequent promotion not to make any difference as regards i11itial fitment. B c The Respondent was appointed as Senior Field Assistant in the year D 1971 at the Central Rice Research Institute in the scale of pay of Rs. 150-300. The said scale was revised to Rs. 330-560 with effect from 1.1.1973 on the recommendation of the Third Pay Commission. On 1.10.1975, the Technical Service Rules of the Indian Council of Agricultural Researc!t (l.C.A.R.) call1e into force. As per these rules, the respondent was indncted E into category I Grade T-2 and bis scale of pay was rixed at Rs. 330- 560. Respondent made a representation that as per rules he ought to have been fitted in the lowest grade of category II i.e. T- II-3 for which the scale of pay prescribed was Rs. 425-700 and also that a Field/Farm Technician holding either a 3 years diploma or a bachelor's degree in the relevant field should be fitted in Category II. Since the representation was not fruitful, F Respondent filed a Writ Petition before the High Court, whi.ch came to be transferred to the Central Administrative Tribunal. The petition was allowfll). by the Tribunal, against which the employer preferred the present appeal. Allowing the appeal, this Court G HELD : 1.1. Para 5.1 of the Technical Service Rules lays down that• . all the existing permanent and temporary employees appointed would be ., fitted into their respective grades specified in Para 3.1 on point to point basis. The respondent who was in the pay 'cale of Rs. 330-560 could only H 301 302 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1994] SUPP. 4 S.C.R. A be fitted into Category I Grade T·2 and only the persons holding positions in the merged scale of Rs. 425·700 i.e. Category I Grade T-1·3 and possess· Ing the necessary qualifications prescribed for Category JI could be fitted in Category II Grade T-II·3 for which also the scale is the same. Merely because one possessed the qualification, he cannot claim as a matter or B right that he should be fitted into Category II Grade T·II-3. The initial induction should be only on the basis or pay scale. Ir the respondent was entitled to be fitted in Category I Grade T • 1 ·3 (Rs. 425· 700) on the relevant date and if he possessed the qualification for Category U then only he could be fitted in Category U Grade T·ll·3 by virtue or Para 5.1 and the C responde.nt conld not be fitted in Category I Grade T • 1 ·3 because or the difference In the pay scale. As per the Rules he could be fitted in Category I Grade T ·ll and merely because he possessed the qualification for Category U he cannot claim as a matter or right to be fitted in Category U Grade T· U-3. Para 5.1 does not permit such an lndnctlon. [306-D to GJ D 1.2. A person fitted In Grade T-2 In Category I cannot straightaway make a claim to Grade T·ll-3 of Category II skipping over the higher grade T·l-3 or Category I which is in between. Ir this Is accepted, then a person in Grade T -1 or Category I which is the lowest In that grade can on the basis that he possesses the qualifications for Category II also claim that E he should also automatically be promoted to Grade T·ll·3 or Category II as per Rule 7.2. That cannot be the object nnderlying Rule 7.2 and such an Interpretation or the Rule can not be given. [307-D to FJ 1.3. The Tribunal, however observed that In the meantime the respondent has been ptomoted to Grade T-1·3 or Category I carrying the F same scale as Grade T·ll·3 of Category II, and therfore he should be deemed.to have been Inducted into Garde T· U-3 Category U. This reason· ing is erroneous. The crucial date is 1.10.1975 on which date the Rules came into force and for fitment into the necessary categories Rule 5.1 has to be applied and the existing employees should be fitted only In the grades G specified in Para 3.1 on point to point basis on the basis on the basis of their existing scales of pay on that date. The subsequent promotion of the respondentfrom Grade T·ll of Category I to Grade T-1-3, the higher grade in the same Category can not make any difference so Car as the init
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.