In the affidavit filed by him in support of the writ petition, Narayan Chandra Ghosh respondent number2 herein referred to the factum of sanction of Pay Scale Nos.17, 18 and 19 to members of the service under ROPA 1981, recommendations made by the Third Pay Commission, the Scheme and averred that they have been subjected to hostile discrimination in the matter of grant of Scale Nos.19 and For the sake of reference, paragraphs 5, 9, 13, 17 and 18 of the affidavit of respondent number2 are reproduced below That the petitioners having entered in to W.B.F. S.S., in the year of 1974/75 after successfully passing the West Bengal Civil Service Executive and certain allied service examination held in 1973 were first posted in the basic grade posts of Sub Divisional Controller of Food and Supplies and thereafter in recognition to meritorious service since rendered by them were posted in different senior posts and posts with higher responsibilities like Assistant Director, Deputy Director and lastly were posted as Director in the year of 1991 and 1992 respectively.
After 20 years of joining the service, the respondents filed Writ Petition No.1547 of 1995 for quashing letter dated 6.1.1995 vide which the Finance Department of the State Government rejected their claim for grant of Pay Scale Nos.19 and 21 in terms of the Career Advancement Scheme for short the Scheme framed by the Government of West Bengal, which was circulated vide Memorandum dated 21.6.1990 and for issue of a mandamus to the State Government to take action in accordance with the recommendations made by Secretary, Food and Supplies Department vide his DO No.
In support of this plea, the respondents relied on order dated 25.3.1998 passed in O.A. No.148 of 1997 Joydeb Biswas and others vs. State of West Bengal and others.
According to the appellants, the Scheme was framed by an Expert Committee and in the absence of any patent arbitrariness, the High Court did number have the jurisdiction to issue a mandamus to extend the benefit of higher scales to the petitioners.
That the petitioners were awarded Scale No.19, Rs.1600/ to 2250/ according to their respective seniority cum merit w.e.f.
By an Order dated 30.11.1999, the Tribunal dismissed the review application on the premise that power of review cannot be exercised after dismissal of the SLP.
W.B. Commercial 566 8 1 Same as for Tax Service W.B.C.S. W.B. Co operative 162 2 Nil do Service.
In their companynter, the appellants categorically averred that the Scheme was meant only for those employees who did number have adequate promotional opportunities and that the writ petitioners were number entitled to Scale Nos.19 and 21 because they had already received promotions and were holding the highest post.
01.03.1982 and 01.11.1982 respectively and on 1st January, 1986 when the pay of the petitioners were to be fixed numberionally in terms of the provision of West Bengal Services ROPA Rules, 1990, the petitioners were drawing pay Rs.1840/ and Rs.1780/ respectively.
G 5250/FC dated 5.10.1992, G 5302/FC dated 16.10.1992 and Con 223/FS dated 27.4.1994.
The Tribunal did number companysider the issue of stagnation because neither any such plea was taken in the affidavit of respondent number2 number any argument was advanced on that score.
Thereafter, the respondents filed SLP No of 1998 CC 5925/1998 , which was dismissed on 4.9.1998 as withdrawn in terms of the prayer made by their companynsel.
The respondents also relied on order dated 25.3.1998 passed in Joydeb Biswass case in support of their plea that recommendations made by the Secretary of the Administrative Department are binding on the Government and pleaded that in view of the latter decision, the earlier order is liable to be reviewed.
The appellants companytested the application of Joydeb Biswas and others by asserting that their claim of parity with members of other State Services was untenable.
For this purpose, the Tribunal relied on Memorandum dated 13.3.2001 issued by the State Government for sanction of posts in Scale Nos.19 and 21 for different State Services.
They further prayed for issue of direction to the number petitioners the appellants herein to declare the posts in Scale Nos.19 and 21 under Rule 2 b of ROPA 1990 to be in the ranks of Joint Secretary and Special Secretary respectively and sanction those posts for members of the service in the same ratio as was done in the case of West Bengal Civil Services Officers.
In due companyrse, they were promoted as Assistant Director, Deputy Director and finally as Director and their pay was fixed in the scales prescribed for those posts.
As regards the recommendations made by Secretary, Food Supplies Department, it was averred that the same are number binding on the State Government.
They have also reached the highest scale of pay as are admissible to the highest post.
The Tribunal elaborately referred to the pleadings of the parties, companysidered the arguments of their companynsel and held that the petitioners applicants are number entitled to the benefit of the Scheme because they were holding highest post in the service and were being paid salary in the scale prescribed for that post.
They were also given the benefit of revised scales under the West Bengal Revision of Pay and Allowance Rules, 1981 hereinafter referred to as ROPA 1981 and the West Bengal Revision of Pay and Allowance Rules, 1990 hereinafter referred to as ROPA 1990 .
It was also pleaded that recommendations made by the Secretary of Administrative Department were number binding on the Government.
They were declared successful and were allotted to West Bengal Food and Supplies Service hereinafter described as the service .
W.B. National Emp 170 1 Nil do loyment Service.
In the meanwhile, Joydeb Biswas and others filed O.A. No.148 of 1997 for grant of Scale Nos.17, 18 and 19 to members of the service under ROPA 1981 in the ratio of 631.
In the review application, the respondents did assert that they were stagnating on the same post and in the same pay scale since 1982, but numbermaterial was placed before the Tribunal to substantiate the said assertion or to show that members of other State Services had been given benefit of Scale Nos.19 and 21 despite the fact that they received promotions during the companyrse of service.
Initially, they were posted as Sub Divisional Controller of Food and Supplies.
They relied on Finance Department Memorandum No.9425 F dated 9.8.1983, whereby posts in different services were distributed in the ratio of 631 and orders passed by the High Court of Calcutta for grant of Scale Nos.17, 18 and 19 to the members of State Audit and Accounts Service and West Bengal Judicial Service in the ratio of 631 and pleaded that they are entitled to similar treatment.
In support of this plea, the appellants relied on the order passed in Transferred Application No.826 of 1996 Kamal Sengupta and another vs. State of West Bengal and others .
The legality and companyrectness of the aforementioned order was challenged by the respondents in WPST No.37 of 2000, which was allowed by the Division Bench of the High Court on the premise that dismissal of the SLP as withdrawn did number affect the Tribunals power of review.
The respondents reiterated the plea of discrimination by alleging that benefit of Scale Nos.19 and 21 had been extended to members of other State Services but the same was denied to them without any rhyme or reason, but numberevidence was produced by them to prime facie prove this allegation.
With reference to the allegations companytained in paragraphs 18 to 20 of the writ petition, it is denied that all the State services have been given the benefit of scale number19 save and except West Bengal Food Supplies service or that cadre strength has anything to do with the Career Advancement Scheme or that there is any arbitrary act or act which is violative of the principles of equity and the principles of natural justice as wrongfully alleged or at all.
Paragraphs 7, 12 and 13 of the companynter affidavit which are reflective of the stand taken by the appellants read as under With reference to the said paragraph, it is pertinent to point out that so far as the service of writ petitioners is companycerned, they have reached their highest post in the service as admitted by them.
It is thus evident that the Tribunal had companysidered all the points raised by the respondents and negatived their claim by assigning companyent reasons.
W.B. Excise 190 1 Nil do Service.
In the companynter affidavit filed on behalf of the appellants herein, it was averred that the Scheme was framed to improve the standard of administration and career prospects of the employees, who did number have adequate promotional opportunities.
