Full Judgment Text
1
Non-Reportable
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
| APPEAL | NO. 8220 |
|---|---|
| t of S.L.P | (C) No. |
Dr. Nawal Kishore Verma and another …Appellants
Versus
The State of Bihar and others …Respondents
O R D E R
JUDGMENT
Leave granted.
2. The present appeal, by special leave, is directed against
the judgment and order dated 10.8.2011 passed in LPA No.
210 of 2009 by the High Court of Judicature at Patna whereby
the Division Bench affirmed the orders dated 17.7.2008 and
28.1.2009 passed in CWJC No. 4098 of 2001 and CWJC No.
17736 of 2008 respectively.
Page 1
2
3. The appellants, who are Homeopathic doctors, being
aggrieved by non-grant of correct scale of pay, knocked at the
doors of the High Court in CWJC No. 8471 of 1994, which was
| er dated | 30.11.1 |
|---|
-
“….. this writ petition is disposed of by
directing the Joint Secretary, Urban
Development Department, Bihar, Patna
(Respondent No. 2) to take a final decision
within a period of eight weeks from the date of
receipt/production of a copy of this judgment
about the extension of the benefit of the
rd th th
recommendations of the 3 , 4 and 5 Pay
revision Committee to the petitioner in the
light of the observations made in this
judgment. It is also made clear that while
taking final decision in the matter, respondent
No. 2 will also take into consideration the pay
scale recommended by the Pay Anomaly
Committee for Homeopathic Doctors, namely,
st
Rs. 2200-4000/- with effect from 1 January,
1986. It is, however, made clear that such pay
scale has been recommended for the degree
holder. Respondent No. 2 will examine whether
the petitioners are degree holders and whether
the benefit of such recommendation of the Pay
Anomaly Committee can be extended to
them.”
JUDGMENT
4. After the said order was passed, the Competent
authority of the Government considered the claim of the
appellants and rejected the same by communication dated
Page 2
3
25.9.1997 observing that there was no anomaly in respect of
the scale admissible to the Homeopathic doctors and the
appellants not being degree holders could not be allowed the
| le to th | e degr |
|---|
directed the local body (Mahnar Municipality) where the
appellants were serving to take a decision in regard to the pay
scale admissible to them in the light of the observations
contained in letter dated 25.9.1997. Thereafter, the
authorities of Mahnar municipality took a decision in the light
of the recommendations of the Pay Revision Committee and
fixed the pay scale of the appellants and sought the approval
of the State Government as per their communications dated
20.7.1999 and 8.2.2000. The State Government vide letter
JUDGMENT
dated 3.1.2001 reiterated the position which was earlier
communicated by letter dated 25.9.1997.
5. Being grieved by the said order the appellants
approached the High Court and the learned single Judge
directed the Municipality to allow the pay scale as per the
recommendations of the Pay Revision Committee that had
been accepted by the State Government for the Homeopathic
doctors. Assailing the said order, the appellants preferred
Page 3
4
Letters Patent Appeal No. 707 of 2008 and the Division Bench
vide order dated 26.9.2008 permitted the appellants to
withdraw the appeal with liberty to apply for reviewing the
order dated 17.7.2008.
6. Thereafter a review was filed forming the subject-
matter of CWJC No. 17736 of 2008. It was contended in the
review application that the petitioners there are the diploma
holder Homeopathic doctors and they were entitled to the
same pay scale which was given to degree holder
Homeopathic doctors and further such higher scale had
already been allowed to one Dr. T. Ekka in compliance with the
order dated 23.2.1993 passed in the writ petition preferred by
said Dr. Ekka. The said submission was opposed by the State
JUDGMENT
stating that it was a mistake and there was no necessity to
exercise the review jurisdiction. The learned single Judge
declined to entertain the review and, accordingly, the same
was dismissed.
7. Thereafter, LPA No. 210 of 2009 was preferred and the
Division Bench took note of the submissions canvassed at the
Bar and opined thus: -
Page 4
5
| on to go<br>whereby | throug<br>the Go |
|---|
In absence of any policy emanating from the
Government to equate the pay scale of the
Diploma holder with that of Degree holders,
we are of the opinion that the appellants have
no wish to claim equal pay with that of Degree
holders.”
Being of this view the LPA was dismissed.
8. We have heard Mr. Amit Pawan, learned counsel for the
JUDGMENT
appellants, and Mr. Gopal Singh and Mr. Chandan Kumar,
learned counsel for the respondents.
9. The learned counsel for the appellants has brought to
our notice the resolution dated 3.2.1981. It is in connection
with grant of pay scale and other facilities to non-teaching
staff of local bodies, equivalent to the Government
Page 5
6
employees. The relevant clauses are (6) and (7) which are
reproduced below: -
| ewly revi<br>pay sc | sed pay<br>ale will |
|---|
(7) Whatever additional financial burden as
a consequence of the above decisions, will
arise, the same will be incurred by the
concerned local bodies, but having regard to
their economic condition, the Government has
taken an immediate decision that as before,
70% of this additional expenditure (30% as
grant and 40% as loan) will be borne by the
Government and the remaining 30% will be
borne by the concerned bodies out of their
own funds. This relief will be payable by the
Government only to the employees who are
working on the posts approved by the
Government. No other financial relief will be
given by the Government under the head of
Establishment.”
JUDGMENT
10. The learned counsel has also drawn our attention to a
Gazette Notification dated 21.11.1992 by the Government of
Bihar. It reads as follows: -
“BIHAR GAZETTE
EXTRAORDINARY ISSUE
PASSED BY THE GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR
28 Agrahayan 1914 (Sa.)
st
Patna, Saturday, 01 December 1992
Page 6
7
Department of Health, Medical Education and
Family Welfare
NOTIFICATION
| V.9.021 | 92-D 716 |
|---|
In light of Ministry of Health, Education and
Family Welfare, Government of India, letter Ref.
14016-1190-Homoeo dated 03.01.1991 and
Central Homoeopathic Council, New Delhi,
letter Ref. 14-12-24186 CCH 16074 dated
13.03.1990, the four year D.H.M.S. (Diploma in
Homeopathic Medicine and Surgery) certificate
(qualification), in homeopathic medicine
stream conferred by a lawfully established
university, institution or board, upto the year
1983, is granted equivalence to a degree.
By orders
Government of Bihar
Surendra Prasad Sinha
Deputy Secretary to the State
JUDGMENT
Published by Superintendent, Government
Printing Material Store and Publication, Patna
Printed by Superintendent, Secretariat Press,
Bihar Patna
Bihar Gazette (Extraordinary), 650-Laego-774-
600 R.P. Singh”
11. From the aforesaid notification it is quite vivid that the
Diploma in Homoeopathic Medicine and Surgery has been in
equivalence to a degree up to the year 1983. There is no
quarrel over the fact that the appellants are fully covered by
Page 7
8
the said notification. At this juncture, it is relevant to refer to
the resolution dated 15.9.1997 which deals with amendment
in the pay scale of Homoeopathic doctors of Department of
| f directio | n given |
|---|
in CWJC No. 2950 of 1995 which was preferred by one Dr.
Amareshwar Prasad. After referring to the order passed by
the High Court in the case of Dr. Amareshwar Prasad, the
Department of Finance of the State of Bihar in the said
resolution stated thus: -
“During the course of scrutiny a fact came to
light that the Department of Health Education
and Family Welfare vide its notification dated
21.11.1992 had decided that the four year
DHMS (Diploma in Homoeopathic Medicine
and Surgery) diploma in homoeopathic
medicine stream conferred by a lawfully
established university, institute or board upto
the year 1983 would be declared equivalent to
a degree. In the aforesaid background the
question of revision in the pay scale of
Homeopathic Doctors was pending before the
Government.
JUDGMENT
In light of the direction of the Hon’ble High
Court and recommendation of fifth Pay
Anomaly Redressal Committee, and after
discussion with Department of the Health,
Medical Education and Family Welfare, the
Government has decided that the Degree
Holder Homeopathic Doctors/ homeopathic
doctors having four year DHMS (Diploma in
Homeopathic Medicine and Surgery) diploma
in homeopathic medicine stream conferred by
Page 8
9
a lawfully established university, institute or
board upto the year 1983 be approved the
payscale of Rs.2200-4000 in place of Rs.1500-
2750.
| m 1.1.8<br>arrear | 6 and<br>due fro |
|---|
12. The learned counsel for the appellants would submit
that the aforesaid resolution is significant as equivalence has
been clearly admitted after referring to the notification dated
21.11.1992. Mr. Amit Pawan, learned counsel, has also drawn
our attention to the communication dated 13.7.1999 by the
Deputy Secretary in the Department of Urban Development,
JUDGMENT
to the Administrator, Municipal Corporation of Muzaffarpur
and Special Officer, Mahnar Municipality, making a special
reference to the present appellants. The relevant part of the
same is as follows: -
“… this is to state that fixation of pay scale of
Dr. Ramakant Sharma and Dr. N.K. Verma,
Medical Officers, is to be made in third, fourth
and fifth pay revision, in compliance of the
orders dated 30.11.1995 passed by Hon’ble
Patna High Court. Dr. Ramakant Sharma and
Page 9
10
| fixation<br>l bodies.” | of pay sc |
|---|
13. After so stating, a direction was issued to the
municipalities to take appropriate action and inform the
Government. In compliance with the aforesaid order of the
State Government, Mahnar Municipality on 20.7.1999 passed
an order after referring to the notification of equivalence
dated 21.11.1992 fixing the pay scale and sent it to the
Government for approval. Be it noted, a similar
communication was sent by Muzaffarpur Municipal
Corporation on 8.2.2000. The State Government, by
JUDGMENT
communication dated 3.1.2001, reiterated its earlier decision
dated 25.9.1997.
14. The learned counsel for the State though made an
endeavour to show that there is no equivalence, yet on the
face of the notifications and orders he could not pursue the
said submission any further. Thereafter, it was urged by him
that it is the municipalities who are to amend the rules and
pay the amount. On a query being made as to how others
Page 10
11
have been paid on a proper decision being taken, we could
not get any satisfactory answer. It is also noticed that certain
doctors of Ranchi Municipality were given the benefit by the
erstwhile State of Bihar.
15. Keeping in view the factum of equivalence,
communications made by the State Government to the
Municipalities and Municipal Corporations, the benefit
extended to other diploma holders and also regard being had
to the fact barring the two appellants no other diploma
holders are there who are covered by the notification dated
21.11.1992, we direct the respondents to extend similar
benefit that were extended to Dr. T. Ekka and Dr. P. Srivastava.
If in their case there has been any apportionment of the
JUDGMENT
financial burden between the State and the municipality, the
same shall apply mutatis mutandis and the order to that
effect shall be passed within six weeks from today and the
benefits shall be given within three months therefrom.
16. Resultantly, the appeal is allowed, the orders passed by
the learned single Judge as well as by the Division Bench are
set aside leaving the parties to bear their respective costs.
Page 11
12
……………………….J.
[Anil R. Dave]
……………………….J.
[Dipak Misra]
New Delhi;
September 12, 2013.
JUDGMENT
Page 12