Service Law:
Service Career Development Scheme – Government Resolution dated 8.6.1995 provided Group C and D employees pay-scale of next promotional post after completion of 12 years of continuous service – By Resolution dated 26.10.2004 accorded sanction to grant pay-scale of ‘Deputy Accountant’ to the ‘Junior Clerks’ who had passed Account Clerk examination and completed 12 years of continuous Service – Senior clerks moved Administrative Tribunal stating that the post of ‘Deputy Accountant’ being promotional post for ‘Senior Clerk’ and not ‘Junior Clerk’, upgradation of pay-scale of ‘Junior Clerk’ resulted in anamoly to ‘Senior Clerks’ – Tribunal struck down the Resolution dated 26.10.2004 – Writ Petition was filed by ‘Junior Clerks’ – During pendency of the writ, Government by Resolution dated 11.9.2009 withdrew the Resolution dated 26.10.2004 – By letter dated 6.10.2009 Government stated that the benefit under Resolution dated 26.10.2004 would continue subject to undertaking by the beneficiaries that if High Court approved the Resolution dated 11.9.2009, the government would recover the benefits – Accordingly undertaking taken from the beneficiaries – In the meantime ‘Junior Clerks’ challenged the Resolution dated 11.9.2009 – Writ Petition of the Senior Clerks was disposed of directing that benefit given pursuant to letter dated 6.10.2009 not to be withdrawn till the Administrative Tribunal decides the challenge to Resolution dated 11.9.2009 – Administrative Tribunal by order dated 4.12.2014 upheld the Resolution dated 11.9.2009 – In writ petition against the order of Tribunal, High Court upheld the Resolution dated 11.9.2009 – However, the Government directed that recovery of excess amount as per undertaking would be of the amount paid after 11.9.2009 and not prior thereto – Appeal to Supreme Court – Held: State Government withdrew the Resolution dated 26.10.2004 by its Resolution dated 11.9.2009 realizing that the former Resolution created anomalous situation – Therefore Tribunal rightly upheld the Resolution dated 11.9.2009 – Junior Clerks were not entitled for the pay-scale of Deputy Accountant as this was not the promotional post for the post of Junior Clerks – The benefits received by the Junior clerks till 4.12.2014 (date of order of Tribunal) were under the orders of High Court – Therefore, the benefits received till 4.12.2014 not to be withdrawn.
Partly allowing the appeal, the Court
HELD: 1.1. The Resolution of the Government dated 26.10.2004 providing for scale of Deputy Accountant to Junior Clerks, who have passed the prescribed departmental examination w as withdrawn by subsequent Government Resolution dated 11.09.2008. The Tribunal is right in its view that the Government Resolution dated 26.10.2004 and 11.09.2008 were issued by the State Government in exercise of its executive powers. Both the above Resolutions do not seek to alter the service conditions of the appellants provided by Government Resolution dated 08.06.1995. Government Resolution dated 26.10.2004 extended certain additional benefits to Finance Department. The State Government later realised that such an action will create an anomalous situation and which actually created anomalous situation. Junior Clerks, who were lower to the Senior Clerks were able to march in the next higher scale of the Senior Clerks without coming in the scale of Senior Clerks and had started drawing salary higher to the various Senior Clerks. [Para 10][1041-F-H; 1042-A]
1.2 The recruitment and promotion of the Junior Clerks, Senior Clerks, in District Treasury were governed by the executive instructions, which can be modified, altered in the same manner in which it was provided by the State Government. The Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal did not commit any error in upholding the Government Resolution dated 11.09.2008. The benefit, which was available to Junior Clerks of next higher grade after completion of 12 years continuous service is still admissible. Thus,the Tribunal did not commit any error in upholding the Government Resolution dated 11.09.2008. [Paras 10 & 11][1042B-D]
2.1 The post of Junior Clerks is borne in the District Cadre and they are also called Treasury Clerks. The post of Senior Clerks is filled up by promotion and nomination in the ratio of 3:1. Junior Clerks, who have passed the examination are eligible for promotion. The Government Resolution dated 08.06.1995 provides for grant of pay-scale of the next promotional post in the promotional hierarchy after completion of 12 years of continuous service. Vide Resolution dated 08.06.1995, Junior Clerks were only entitled for the next promotional post, i.e., promotional post of Senior Clerks and under Resolution dated 08.06.1995, they were not entitled to receive a higher promotional post, i.e., post of Deputy Accountants, which is filled up by promotion of Senior Clerks. [Para 14][1043-D-E]
2.2 The appellants themselves have filed Annexure P-2 as the statement showing service particulars of appellants, which indicate that the pay-scale of Deputy Accountant was granted to the appellants on the basis of Government Resolution dated 26.10.2004. The appellants, thus, were not granted scale of Deputy Accountant by virtue of Resolution dated 08.06.1995, hence the submission of the appellants that they are entitled for pay-scale of Deputy Accountant despite withdrawal of Resolution dated 26.10.2004 cannot be accepted. [Para 15][1043-F-H]
3. The High Court by the impugned judgment permitted the respondents to recover excess payments made to the petitioners after 11.09.2008 by way of monthly instalments and the respondents were restrained from effecting recovery or benefits secured by the petitioners prior to 11.09.2008. The benefits, which were received by the appellants till 04.12.2014 were under the order of the High Court dated 05.12.2009. Therefore the benefit received by the appellant till 04.12.2014 be not withdrawn when it was pronounced that the Resolution dated 11.09.2008 was valid, the benefit received by the appellants thereafter can only be withdrawn. Thus, in the facts of the present case, ends of justice be served in modifying the directions of the High Court only to the extent that in place of date 11.09.2008, the date 04.12.2014 be substituted. [Paras 16 & 19][1044-A-B; 1046-H; 1047-A-B]
As published in the Supreme Court Reports, Supreme Court of India. Text from the Indian Supreme Court Judgments open data set (Dattam Labs), CC BY 4.0.
This page is for informational and research purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Consult a qualified advocate for advice specific to your situation.