Full Judgment Text
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 2
PETITIONER:
PURNA CHANDRA NANDA
Vs.
RESPONDENT:
STATE OF ORISSA & ANR.
DATE OF JUDGMENT: 01/05/1996
BENCH:
RAMASWAMY, K.
BENCH:
RAMASWAMY, K.
MANOHAR SUJATA V. (J)
CITATION:
JT 1996 (5) 459 1996 SCALE (4)478
ACT:
HEADNOTE:
JUDGMENT:
O R D E R
This appeal by special leave arises form the order of
the Orissa administrative Tribunal made on September 13,
1991 in T.A. No. 302/86. The admitted position is that the
appellant was appointed as a Veterinary Extension Officer on
10.10.1958. Thereafter in 1965, he was posted as Supervisor
in Milk Service Scheme at Rourkela as In-charge of animals
stationed at Khapuria. In 1969 also, he was posted as Dairy
Overseer. The appellant claimed to have been promoted to the
rank of Dairy Supervisor on 26.11.1969 and was posted as
Farm Manager in District Livestock breeding Farm. He claimed
that he is entitled to equal pay for equal work form 1969 to
1974 and from 1974 to 1977 as Form Manager. It is an
admitted position that in 1977, he obtained B.V.S. degree
and on his securing the degree he was given the pay-scale of
Rs.525-975/- applicable to Class ii Gazetted scale from
1.7.77. Farm Manager is Class ii post. The Tribunal has
pointed out in the order that though the Farm Manager is an
inter- changeable post, it is not an intermediary between
Gazette cadre and the immediate post held by the appellant.
It has pointed out that in the Diary Department of Dairy
wing. the service consists of Dairy Overseer, Dairy
Supervisor and Dairy Inspector last of which is equivalent
to Gazetted post. The Farm Manager post is held by both
Class II and Class I officers depending upon the exigencies
of the post.
Shri Misra, learned counsel for the appellant,
contended that the High Court in writ petition O.J.C.
No.1189/73 and other matters had held that the Farm Manager
post is an intermediary post for promotion to the Gazetted
cadre. Al persons who hold that post are entitled to equal
pay. That order came to be final by dismissal of the SLP by
this Court. Consequently, the appellant having held the post
of a Farm Manager is entitled to equal pay. In the counter-
affidavit field in the Tribunal as well as in this Court,
the Government has pointed that the holders of the post are
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 2
having different scale of pay. Mere exigency of holding the
post as a Farm Manager do not per se entitle the incumbent
to the same scale of pay which was not admissible to the
person who held the post as Dairy Supervisor. It is pointer
out that the scale of pay varies according to the gazetted
or non-Gazetted cadre. In paragraph 7 of the counter-
affidavit filed in this Court, They have reiterated the
distinction between the various posts held by the persons in
the farm branch and Dairy branch. Merely because the posts
are inter-changeable as Farm Manager, they do not
automatically become entitled to be the holder of the post
and for the same scale of pay. The meet of the matter is
that scales of pay are different and direction to grant
equal pay is to allow the meet of the matter is that scales
of pay are different and direction to grant equal pay is to
allow the appellant to jump the queue and land in a higher
ladder. The Tribunal, Therefore, was right in refusing to
grant the same scale of pay to the appellant on the day on
which he was not entitled as per his seniority. Though Shri
Misra contended that the appellant was promoted to the post
of a Farm Manager, we do not find any acceptable material on
record to conclude that he was holding Class II Gazetted
post own right. Under these circumstances, the principle of
equal pay for equal work cannot be used as a shield to reach
higher cadder of service in accordance with rules of
promotion and seniority. The Tribunal is well justified in
distinguishing the judgment of the High Court not giving the
same benefit.
The appeal is accordingly dismissed. No costs.