Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

SMT.MARIYAM JOYEL versus DIRECTOR, MEDICAL EDUCATION AND TRAINING AND OTHERS

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Smt.Mariyam Joyel v. Director, Medical Education And Training And Others - WRIT - A No. 53978 of 1999 [2007] RD-AH 5395 (26 March 2007)

 

This is an UNCERTIFIED copy for information/reference. For authentic copy please refer to certified copy only. In case of any mistake, please bring it to the notice of Joint Registrar(Copying).

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ALLAHABAD

COURT NO.24

Civil Misc. Writ Petition   No. 53978  of   1999

Smt. Mariyam Joyel   ............................................................    Petitioner

Versus

Director Medical Education &

Training   and others ...............................          Respondents

....................................

Hon'ble Ashok Bhushan, J.

Heard counsel for the petitioner and the learned standing counsel.  Counter and rejoinder affidavits have been exchanged and with the consent of parties the writ petition  is being finally disposed of.

The petitioner has been permitted to amend the writ petition  by adding a relief to quash the order dated 24.2.2001 passed by the State Government rejecting the representation of the petitioner. The petitioner was appointed as Clinical Instructor on 18.8.1987 in the pay scale of  Rs. 622-940 in Nursing & Training College, Kanpur.  By  Government order  dated 30.8.1990 the Clinical Instructors were granted pay scale of Rs.1600-2660. The petitioner's pay was thus revised in the pay scale of Rs.1600-2660 in pursuance of the recommendations of the Samta Samiti (1989).  Subsequently the pay scale was again revised  from 1.1.1996 and the petitioner's salary  was accordingly fixed on 26.2.1998 at the time of fixation the existing pay scale of the petitioner referred as Rs.1600-2660.   Petitioner's case in the writ petition  is that her pay scale  of Rs.1600-2660 was already amended and sanctioned as Rs.1640-2900 by virtue of  Government order  dated 26.11.1993 but the said  Government order  was not with the Principal at the relevant time and the salary of the petitioner was fixed in the pay scale of Rs.1600-2660.  Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that in this writ petition  an order was passed by this Court on 21.12.1999 directing the respondent no. 3 to take decision in respect of the representation of the petitioner dated 15.11.1999.   In pursuance of the said order the decision has been taken by the State Government  on 24.2.2001 which has been challenged in this writ petition.

I have considered the submissions of counsel for the petitioner and perused the record.      

From the order dated 24.2.2001 impugned in the writ petition it is clear that the said order proceeds on the basis that in Government order  dated 30.8.1990, the pay scale of Clinical Instructor  was as Rs.1600-2660.  Subsequently, the same pay scale was revised  into Rs. 5000-8000/- and the petitioner is being paid salary accordingly.  In the impugned order although the  Government order  dated 30.8.1990 has been referred but the said order  does not take notice of the  Government order  dated  22.5.1993  which has been filed by the State along with the supplementary counter affidavit dated 23.2.2007.  The State Government issued  Government order  dated 22.5.1993 by which it has been communicated  that the State Government has granted permission to amend the earlier  Government order  dated 30.8.1990 and 1.2.1990 sanctioning the pay scale of Rs. 1640-2900 for Clinical Instructor . Thus according to the  Government orders  dated 22.5.1993  the petitioner was clearly entitled  for the pay scale of Rs. 1640-2900/-.  The petitioner's pay fixation  with effect from 1.1.1996 has been made on the basis of treating the petitioner's existing pay scale as Rs.1600-2660/-.  The letter of the Principal dated 31.5.2006 has also been filed by the State Government as Annexure 6 to the supplementary counter affidavit  by which the Principal has prayed for giving copy of the  Government order  dated 22.5.1993 by which the Clinical Instructor's pay scale  has been sanctioned Rs. 1640- 2900/- instead of Rs.1600-2660/-.   From the aforesaid it is clear that the petitioner's  pay  was fixed treating his pay scale of  Rs. 1600-2660  after 1.1.1996 which is apparent from Annexure-4 to the writ petition   which is the fixation of the pay of the petitioner in pursuance of the  Government order  dated 22.12.1997 and 23.12.1997 after revision of the pay scale  from 1.1.1996.  Thus there is error in the fixation of the pay of the petitioner according to the   Government order  dated 30.8.1990 and 1.2.1990  as modified vide order dated 22.5.1993 the pay scale of the Clinical Instructor  was Rs.1640-2900 instead of Rs. 1600-2660.  The petitioner was clearly entitled for fixation in accordance  with the  Government order  dated 22.5.1993 which has not been done.  The order of the State Government dated 24.2.2001 rejecting the representation of the petitioner  does not take notice of the  Government order  dated 22.5.1993 hence cannot be sustained.   In view of the aforesaid ends of justice be served in directing the respondent no. 4 to re-fix  the salary of the petitioner treating her pay scale as Rs.1640-2900 as per  Government order  dated 22.5.1993. Subsequent fixation be accordingly made .

Consequently the writ petition  is allowed partly and a direction is issued to respondent no. 4 to re-fix the salary of the petitioner expeditiously preferably within a period of two months from the date of production of a certified copy of this order.  It is needless to say that in consequence of re-fixation  the petitioner shall be entitled for consequential benefits in accordance with law.

D/-26.3.2007

SCS


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.