1. Rule. Learned counsel for the respondents waive service on behalf of the respective respondents. With the consent of both the sides, the matter is taken up for final hearing today itself. These petitions involve common questions on facts and law and hence, they are disposed of by this common judgment.
SCA/5089/2012 3/10 JUDGMENT
2. The limited question that has come up for my consideration is whether the respondents are justified in not granting the benefits of revised pay-scales of 6th Pay Commission to the employees of respondent-Gujarat Water Resources Development Corporation (hereinafter referred to the "the Corporation" for short) with effect from 01.01.2009 instead of 01.01.2006.
3. The petitioners herein are employees of respondent-Corporation serving on different posts. The respondent-Corporation is a Government of Gujarat Undertaking registered under the Companies Act, 1956 and was established in the year 1971 vide Government Resolution dated 02.04.1971. It is engaged in the activity of maintenance and operation of Tube-Wells situated in different parts of the State and such other activities as may be entrusted by the State Government from time to time. The employees of respondent- Corporation are treated as employees of the State Government for all purposes and their service conditions are also governed by Rules that are framed by the State Government from time to time.
4. By Government Resolution dated 12.02.2009 the State Government accepted the recommendations of the 6th Pay Commission and resolved to grant the benefit of revised Pay-scales to all the employees of the SCA/5089/2012 4/10 JUDGMENT State Government and District Panchayats with effect from 01.01.2006 on certain terms and conditions. In furtherance of the above Resolution, the State Government passed another Resolution dated 27.02.2009 in respect of all the employees working in different Government Public Sector Undertakings, Government Boards and Government Corporations run and managed by the State Government on certain terms and conditions.
5. Pursuant to the passing of Resolution dated 27.02.2009, the Board of Directors of the respondent- Corporation sent a proposal to respondent-Narmada Water Resources, Water Supply and Kalpasar Department to grant the benefits of revised Pay-scales of 6th Pay Commission to the employees of the respondent-Corporation.
6. However, by Government Resolution dated 20.04.2011, it was resolved to grant the benefits of revised Pay-scales to the employees of respondent- Corporation only with effect from 01.01.2009 and not with effect from 01.01.2006.
7. Being aggrieved by the aforesaid action of the respondents, the petitioners have filed the present petitions with a prayer to quash and set aside the SCA/5089/2012 5/10 JUDGMENT Government Resolution dated 20.04.2011 and to direct the respondents to grant the benefits of revised Pay- scales of 6th Pay Commission with effect from 01.01.2006 instead of 01.01.2009 to all the employees of the respondent-Corporation.
8. The main ground under which the petitioners have challenged the Government Resolution is that all the employees of the respondent-Corporation are treated as the employees of the State Government for all purposes and all the employees have been granted and have been getting all benefits, as are granted to the employees of the State Government. The respondents have granted the benefits of 3rd, 4th and 5th Pay Commissions to the employees of the respondent- Corporation from the dates on which the employees of the State Government had been granted the benefits. Therefore, it has been submitted on behalf of the petitioners that there is no valid or rational justification in denying the benefits of revised Pay-scale of 6th Pay Commission to the employees of the respondent- Corporation w.e.f. 01.01.2006.
9. On behalf of the respondents, it has been submitted that the decision to grant benefits of the revised Pay-scale with effect from 01.01.2009 is a policy decision of the State Government. It has been SCA/5089/2012 6/10 JUDGMENT submitted that said decision was taken after considering different factors, particularly, the financial implications. It was, therefore, submitted that this Court may not interfere with the policy decision taken by the State Government vide its Resolution dated 20.04.2011.
9.1 In support of the submission, reliance has been placed on a decision of the Apex Court in the case of State of West Bengal v. Subhas Kumar Chatterjee and others, (2010) 11 SCC 694 wherein, it has been held that Courts should avoid giving a declaration granting a particular scale of pay and compel the Government to implement the same. The equation of posts and equation of salaries is a matter which is best left to an expert body and that fixation of pay and determination of parity in duties and responsibilities is a complex matter, which is for the Executive to discharge.
10. Heard learned counsel for the respective parties. It is not in dispute that the petitioners herein, who are employees of the respondent-Corporation, have been granted benefits of the 3rd, 4th and 5th Pay Commissions from the dates on which the employees of the State Government had been granted the said benefits. Prima facie, the matter requires serious consideration by the State Government since no reasons have been given for denying the benefits of the revised Pay-scale of 6th Pay SCA/5089/2012 7/10 JUDGMENT Commission to the employees of the respondent- Corporation with effect from 01.01.2006, when the State Government has extended the benefits of revised Pay-scale of 6th Pay Commission to employees of different Public Sector Undertakings, Government Boards and Government Corporations with effect from 01.01.2006. However, at the same time, this Court is cautious about the fact that in matters pertaining to fixation of pay, the Executive is the expert body.
11. Under the circumstances, the Court deems it fit to relegate the matter to a specially constituted Committee, which shall look into the grievances raised by the petitioners in the present proceedings. The Court is of the view that if, ultimately, the petitioners succeed in the present proceedings, then the State Government would be financially burdened with the principal amount and interest; and on the other side, a large number of employees of the respondent-Corporation would be required to wait for an unknowingly indefinite period in the hope of getting their legitimate right.
12. In view of the above, the following order is passed;
(I) The State Government shall constitute a Special Committee consisting of three authorities, namely, the Principal Secretary, Finance SCA/5089/2012 8/10 JUDGMENT Department, the Principal Secretary, General Administration Department and the Principal Secretary, Narmada Water Resources, Water Supply and Kalpasar Department within a period of Four Weeks from today, which shall be entrusted with the duty to look into the grievances raised by the petitioners in the present proceedings.
(II) The petitioners herein shall file separate or common detailed representation/s regarding the subject matter before the specially constituted Committee, as aforesaid, within a period of Thirty Days from today.
If a common representation is made, then the same shall be made on behalf of a person, who shall act as the Representative of all the petitioners.
(III) On receipt of such representation/s from the petitioners or their Representative, the Committee shall issue Notice to the petitioners or the Representative, as the case may be, informing about the date on which hearing shall take place in connection with the subject matter.
(IV) While deciding the case of the petitioners, it is expected that the specially constituted Committee SCA/5089/2012 9/10 JUDGMENT will consider in true spirit the Resolutions passed by the State Government whereby, the benefits of revised Pay-scale of 6th Pay Commission have been granted to the employees of different Public Sector Undertakings, Government Boards and Government Corporations with effect from 01.01.2006.
(V) The aforesaid exercise shall be completed within a period of One Year from the date of constitution of the Committee prescribed in clause- (I) herein above.
13. With the above directions, the petitions stand disposed of. It is made clear that this Court has not entered into the merits of the case and has passed this order looking to the larger interest of both the sides and it is expected that the respondents will decide the matter in its true spirit. If, ultimately, the decision taken by such Committee is adverse to the petitioners, then the petitioners shall be at liberty to file appropriate applications for revival of these petitions or file fresh petitions challenging such decision. Direct service permitted.
[K. S. JHAVERI, J.] SCA/5089/2012 10/10 JUDGMENT Pravin/*