STATE OF ORISSA AND ORS. versus JOGINDER PATJOSHI AND ANR.

Citation: [2003] SUPP. 5 S.C.R. 492 · Decided: 13-11-2003 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: V.N. KHARE, S.B. SINHA · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Judgment (excerpt)

A 
B 
c 
STATE OF ORISSA AND ORS. 
v. 
JOGINDER PATJOSHI AND ANR. 
NOVEMBER 13, 2003 
[V.N. KHARE, CJ. AND S.B. SINHA, J.] 
Service Law: 
Orissa Revised Scales of Pay Rules, 1985: 
rr. 8(/)(a) and (b)-Revision of pay scales and fixation of pay-
Lecturers and Professors-Prior to revision of pay w.ef 1.1.1986, getting 
emoluments less than the minimum of revised pay scale-Pay fixed at the 
minimum of revised pay scale as per r. 8(/)(a)--Claim for increasing pay by 
one increment under r. 8(/)(b)-High Court allowing writ petition holding 
that though petitioners' case fell under r. 8(/)(a), they were entitled to one 
further increment as per exception contained in r.8(/)(b), and the rule being 
a beneficial one required liberal construction-Held, there being no ambiguity 
in r. 8(/)(a), writ petitioners were only entitled to the minimum of revised 
scale-On fact, the principle of liberal interpretation has no application 
inasmuch as by reason of r.8, the State merely specified mode and manner 
of application thereof-Furthermore, clauses (a) and (b) of r.8, having regard 
to the rule of punctuation, must be read separately-Interpretation of statutes. 
Padma Sundara Rao (dead) and Ors. v. State ofT.N. and Ors., (2002) 3 
SCC 533; Union of India and Anr. v. Hansoli Devi and Ors., (2002) 7 SCC 
273 and Dayal Singh and Ors. v. Union of India and Ors., (2003) 2 SCC 593, 
relied on. 
ll/achi Devi (D) by Lrs. and Ors. v. Jain Society, Protection of Orphans 
India and Ors., (2003) AIR SCW 4824, referred to. 
l.R.C. v. Hinchy 1960 Appeal Cases 738, referred to. 
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No. 5579of1998. 
From the Judgment and Order dated 19.11.96 of the Orissa High Court 
in O.J.C. No. 7869of1994. 
492 
STA TE OF ORIS SA v. JOGINDER PA TJOSHI 
493 
WITH 
A 
C.A. No. 5580 and 5581 of 1998. 
Jana Kalyan Das for the Appellants. 
Y.P. Mahajan and R.C. Verma for the Respondents. 
B 
The following Order of the Court was delivered : 
Interpretation of Rules 8(1) (a) and (b) of the orissa Revised Scales of 
Pay Rules, 1985 (for short the Rules'), purported to have been framed under 
Article 309 of the Constitution of India, falls for consideration in these C 
appeals which arises out of the judgment and order dated 19th November, 
1996. The respondents herein were holding the post of Lecturers and professors 
in the University. The interpretation of the Rules arose in the context ofa writ 
petition filed by the Lecturers and Professors of the Berhampur University 
Teachers' Association in the High Court of Orissa. The pay scales of the 
Lecturers and Professors was Rs. 700-1600 and Rs. 1500-2500 respectively. By D 
the aforesaid Rules, which came into force on 1st January, 1986, the scales 
of pay of the Lecturers and Professors were sought to be revised. The revised 
pay scales of the Lecturers and Professors was fixed at Rs. 2200-4000 and 
4500-7300 respectively. On the relevant date i.e. immediately prior to I st 
January, 1986, the professors were getting Rs. 2927 under the Rules. 
E 
The respondents filed a writ petition before the Orissa High Court, 
claiming therein that in addition to the minimum of Rs. 4500-7300, one further 
increment is also to be given as required under Rules 8( I) (b ). 
At the time when the aforesaid writ petition was filed, a Division Bench F 
of the High Court ofOrissa in O.J.C. No. 2588of1991 took a view that while 
fixing the emoluments of the Teachers of the University under the UGC scales, 
an additional increment is to be given at the initial stage. However, another 
Division Bench in O.J.C. No. 6405 of 1992 was of the view that no such 
increment is to be given at the initial stage of fixation in the revised pay scales 
under the Rules. In view of the conflicting decisions of two coordinate G 
Benches of he High Court, the writ petition filed by the Berhampur University 
Teachers' Association was referred for decision to a larger Bench. 
Rules 8 (I) (a) and (b) of the Rules reads as thus: 
"8 (I) Unless in any case the University by special order otherwise H 
494 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS (2003) SUPP. 5 S.C.R. 
A 
directs, the pay of a University employee, who elects or is deemed to 
have elected so be governed by the revised scale from the I st day 
of January, 1985 shall be fixed: 
B 
c 
D 
(a) at the minimum of the revised scale if the amount of the 
existing emolument is less than the minimum: 
(b) at the stage of the revised scale, which is equal to the amount 
of existing emolu

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