1. By way of this petition, the petitioner has prayed to direct the respondent Board to give benefit of Fifth Pay Commission to the petitioner i.e. to revise the pay scale of the petitioner from Rs. 1350-2200 to Rs. 4500-Rs. 7000/- as per recommendations of the Fifth Pay Commission and also direct the respondent to give such benefits from the year 1998.
2. The facts of the present case in brief are that the petitioner was appointed through employment exchange on the post of Wireman in the pay scale of Rs. 260-400 in Public Health Department on 12.2.1979. The said scale was refixed in the pay scale of Rs. 260-430. Thereafter, the Government enacted Gujarat Water Supply and Sewerage Board under the provisions of Section 3 of the Gujarat Water Supply and Sewerage Board Act, 1978 and by Notification dated 30.3.1981 all the employees including the petitioner were transferred to the services of the Board. Thereafter, the respondent promoted the petitioner to the post of Engine Driver in the pay scale of Rs. 350-560 vide order dated 15.4.1983. Later on, the designation of the petitioner was changed from Engine Driver to Head Wireman. On passing the examination of Electrical Supervisor, his pay scale was refixed and the petitioner was given the scale of Rs. 1350-2200 by order dated 31.7.1991.
3. In the year 1998, the Government accepted the recommendations of Fifth Pay Commission to revise the pay scale of all the employees of the State Government including the Boards. The respondent Board implemented the recommendations of the Fifth Pay Commission and Pay scales of the employees were revised accordingly. However, the petitioner was not given the benefits of the Fifth Pay Commission and his pay scale was not revised as per the recommendations of the Commission. The petitioner made representations to the respondents but no reply was received.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that as per the recommendations of the Fifth Pay Commission, the petitioner is entitled to the pay scale of Rs. 4500-7000. He further contended that the petitioner is not granted the benefits of the Fifth Pay Commission because of the pendency of the petition. The petitioner was given benefits of Fourth Pay Commission and therefore he is entitled for the benefits of Fifth Pay Commission which were given to other employees of the respondent Board.
5. Learned counsel for the respondent Mr. Munshaw pointed out that since the post of Head Wireman is not sanctioned post and he is not holding I.T.I. Pass and he is illegally appointed, he is not entitled to the benefits of Fifth Pay Commission. However, the case of the petitioner was recommended by a Committee of the Board and accepted the representation of the petitioner. However, Head Office put up the case for approval.
6. Learned counsel for the respondent Mr. Munshaw submitted that there was no post and cadre of Work Charge Head Wireman and the petitioner was wrongfully appointed and promoted in the said cadre. He submitted that as per the Fourth Pay Commission Report, the pay scale of the petitioner was revised. He further submitted that petitioner does not hold qualification of I.T.I. or equivalent qualification and therefore he is not entitled to the pay scale of Rs. 4500-7000.
6.1 He has also submitted that in absence of any cadre and pay scale meant for Head Wireman, the Board was required to get approval for revision of pay scale from the Head Office which was not done in the present case. He further submitted that a proposal for granting pay scale of Rs. 4500- 7000 meant for Head Wireman of R & B Department was sent to the Government through Head Office which was turned down by the Government vide order dated 2.8.2001. In view of this, the petitioner is not entitled for the pay scale of Rs. 4500- 7000 meant for Head Wireman of the State Government.
6.2 He submitted that in view of the stand taken by the order passed by the authority, before proceeding with the matter, the issue which is required to be resolved is whether the petitioner is entitled for the benefits of Fifth Pay Commission.
7. The petitioner was granted the benefits of Fourth Pay Commission. He was admittedly getting the pay scale of Rs. 1350-2200. While granting the benefits of Fourth Pay Commission to the petitioner, the question of qualification of the petitioner or recruitment process was not raised by the respondents. The question of petitioner's not holding I.T.I. Pass or equivalent qualification is uncalled for and the contention raised by the respondents that the petitioner is not entitled for the pay scale of Rs. 4500-7000 is misconceived because while fixing the pay scale of Rs. 1350-2200, the petitioner was holding the same qualification which is prescribed by the Revision of Pay Rules. In that view of the matter, the petitioner is entitled to the pay scale of Rs. 4500-7000.
7.1 A contention was raised that no order of approval or permission for revision of pay scale was obtained from the Head Office of the Board. Merely raising such contention at the time of granting the benefits is not permissible. The respondents have given the benefits of Fourth Pay Commission to the petitioner and the pay scale of the petitioner was fixed at Rs. 1350-2200 which is revised to Rs. 4500-7000 as per the recommendations of the Fifth Pay Commission. Therefore, the petitioner is entitled for the pay scale of Rs. 4500-7000 and other benefits as per the recommendations of the Fifth Pay Commission which the other employees of respondent Board were given.
7.2 The respondents are directed to give the pay scale of Rs. 4500-7000 and other benefits to the petitioner from the date on which the other employees of the respondent Board are given the said benefits. The respondents are also directed to make payment of arrears on or before 31.12.2012.
In the result, the petition is allowed. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent.
(K.S. JHAVERI, J) (pkn)