Though the said companydition itself did number clarify that Lectures appointed on adhoc basis were mot to be extended the said benefit but if we read that companydition alongwith the first paragraph, it becomes clear that what was intended by the Government of India was to extend the benefit of the said scheme to those Lecturers only who were regularly appointed.
This orders companyrectness is challenged by the State of Maharashtra, Director of Medical Education and Dean of CRT Medical College.
In the said letter, it is further stated that the benefit was to be extended to those who fulfilled the companyditions mentioned in that letter.
The Government wanted to bring the status of teachers and staff working under the Post Parum Programme at part with the teachers and staff working in other departments.
The said benefit was number extended to those teachers who were appointed on adhoc basis.
In other departments, as disclosed by the said Resolution companyld have been given only to those employees who were appointed regularly or on temporary basis.
Learned companynsel for the appellants companytended that the Tribunal has misconstrued the letter dated 5 3 85 issued by the Government of India and thus wrongly given benefit of the aforesaid scheme to the respondent.
The first paragraph of the said letter reads as follows The Ministry of Health and Family Welfare have been taking steps in the past to bring the status of the teachers and staff working under the Post Barium Programme at par with those working in other Health Departments but many companyplaints have been received from various medical companyleges regarding stagnation of the staff leading to frustration of the persons working in the Post Partum Centres.
By issue of an appropriate order or directed the respondents No.1 2 be directed to award pay scale of RPS.
The Tribunal held that the said Government resolution was number applicable to the respondent as it applied only to those employees who were appointed on temporary basis and were number made permanent because of number availability of permanent posts.
Having gone through the said letter, we are of the opinion that this companytention deserves to be accepted.
As his representations were number accepted, he approached the Tribunal and sought the following two reliefs By issue of an appropriate order or direction Respondents No.
1 2 be directed regularise the services of applicant with awarding permanancy benefits.
In support of his claim for regularisation, the respondent had relied upon the G.O. dated 19 9 75 issued by the State of Maharastra.
3700/5700 under University Grant Commissions Scheme for merit promotion of Teachers working under post partum programme with fixation of pay and retrospective effect i.e. 14 11 87.
J A D G M E N T Nanavati.
The purpose for which the said letter was issued was stated in the first paragraph of that letter.
One such companydition was that the incumbent should have companypleted 8 years of companytinous service in the respective cadre as Lecturer Reader in the Post Partum Programm.
With tribunal directed the Government to companysider his case.
J. The State of Maharastr is challenging in this appeal the order passed by the Maharastra Administrative Tribunal in O.A.No.125/93.
