THE STATE OF GOA AND ANR. ETC. ETC. versus SMT. YVETTE PEREIRA A.E. COSTA ETC. ETC.

Citation: [1996] SUPP. 1 S.C.R. 298 · Decided: 12-04-1996 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: K. RAMASWAMY · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Judgment (excerpt)

A 
B 
c 
THE STATE OF GOA AND ANR. ETC. ETC. 
v. 
SMT. YVETTE PEREIRA A.E. COSTA ETC. ETC. 
APRIL 12, 1996 
[K. RAMASWAMY AND G.B. PATTANAIK, .J.T.] 
Se1vice Law : 
Goa, Daman and Diu (Absorbed Employees) Act, 1965/Goa Daman 
and Diu Administration Act, 1962/Goa, Daman and Diu (Absorbed 
employees) Rules, 1965 : 
S2(a)/s. 5/Rules 2(c), 2(e), 4,7,15-Employee appointed in 1963 under 
Union Tenito1y of Goa, Daman and Diu--Claim for pay scales as admissible 
to 'absorbed employee'-Held, a pmon eligible for benefit of S.5 of ad-
D ministration act must be an employee existing as on December 20, 1961 on 
the post held under Po1tuguese Administration-In the instant case claimants 
are not eligible to pay of the posts prescribed in the decree granted by the 
Po1tuguese Adniinistration. 
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No. 7566 of 
E 
1996 Etc. Etc. 
From the Judgment and Order dated 18.1.95 of the Bombay High 
Court in W.P. No. 474 of 1994. 
Dhruv Mehta, S.K. Mehta, Fazlin Anam, Aman Vachher for the 
F 
Appellants. 
Kailash Vasdev for the Respondents. 
The following Order of the Court was delivered : 
G 
Delay condoned. 
Leave granted. We have heard learned counsel on both sides. 
N~at question of law raised by Mr. Dhruv Mehta, learned counsel 
for the appellant is whether respondents are absorbed employees within 
H the meaning of Section 2( a) of the Goa, Daman and Diu (Absorbed 
298 
• 
STATE v. YVETTE PEREIRAAE. COSTA 
299 
Employees) Act, 1965 (for short, the 'Act'). The admitted position is that A 
Goa, Daman and din which hitherto under the hold of Portuguese, was 
liberated on December 20, 1961 and integrated as part of Indian territory. 
The posts in the judicial Department were created by a Portuguese decree. 
All the respondents came to be appointed on or after De~ember 20, 1961, 
sometime in the year 1963. The Commissioner (Finance) of Goa, Daman 
B 
& Diu Administration had issued a circular on September 15, 1962 
prescribing pay-scales to various posts. For the posts in the Judicial 
Department held by the respondents, the pay-scale was Rs. 335-525. Their 
representation lo the Government for fixation of pay-scales prescribed for 
the posts created by the Portuguese Administration, was considered and 
an order came to be passed on September 20, 1989 under which they are C 
made entitled to the pay-scales initially prescribed to the posts under 
Portuguese decree. But, subsequently, the Government, having realised the 
mistake had cancelled the same by proceedings dated December 27, 1990. 
That order came to be challenged in the High Court which has held that 
by operation of Section 5 of the Goa, Daman & Diu Administration Act, D 
the respondents came to be continued on the posts created prior to 
December 20, 1961 and, therefore, they were entitled to the pay--<;cales 
prescribed for those posts. The said order of the High Court was made in 
Writ Petition No. 77 of 1991, dated August 30, 1993 and followed in other 
cases which are the subject-matter of these appeals. 
The Act defines 'absorbed employees' in Section 2( a) thus : 
"2(a). 'absorbed employee's means a person who immediately 
before the 20th day of December, 1961, was holding an absorbed 
post and who on and after that date either served or has been 
serving in that or any other post in connection with the administra-
tion of the Union Territory of Goa, Daman & Diu or in any of the 
Departments of the Centrt1l Government.
11 
E 
F 
"Absorbed post" defined nnder section 2(b) means a civil service or 
post which existed under the former Portuguese Administration in Goa, G 
Daman & Diu immediately before the 20th day of December, 1961. 
Admittedly, after the appointed day, rules have been made on 
December 27, 1965 under which Rule 2(c) defines 'appointed day' to be 
the 1st day of February 1966. Under rule 2(e), "existing pay" means the pay 
admissible to an absorbed employee immediately before the appointed day H 
300 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1996] SUPP. 1 S.C.R. 
A by way of basic pay and shall include complementary pay and the charge 
allowance !,,>ranted under Rule 15. "Absorbed Employees" as again defined, 
means an absorbed employee as defined in Clause (a) of Section 2 of the 
Act and who on the appointed day is serving either in connection with the 
administration of the Union Territory or in any department of the Central 
B 
c 
D 
E 
F 
Government. The explanation amplifies as to who are intended to be 
absorbed employees. Rule 3 

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