Facts
The petitioner was initially appointed as a Peon (Class-IV) by Bhavnagar University in 1980 and confirmed in 1982
Source reference: p. 2In 2000, he was appointed as a "Machine Man" on probation and confirmed in 2001
Source reference: p. 2Upon his superannuation on June 14, 2020, the petitioner requested the University to treat the post of Machine Man as a Class-III post rather than Class-IV for the purpose of retirement benefits
Source reference: p. 3The University issued a communication dated August 27, 2020, requesting further details from the petitioner to justify this reclassification
Source reference: p. 3The petitioner challenged this communication via Article 226, seeking a direction to fix his pension based on Class-III pay scales
Source reference: p. 2Issues
1. Whether the University’s communication dated August 27, 2020, seeking clarification of the petitioner's status, was illegal or arbitrary
Source reference: p. 2, 62. Whether the post of "Machine Man" held by the petitioner qualifies as a Class-III post entitling him to higher retirement benefits
Source reference: p. 3, 6Law Applied
State Government Resolution dated June 19, 2018, which extended the 7th Pay Commission benefits to University employees and categorized the post of Machine Man specifically under Pay Level IS-3 (commencing at Rs. 15,700)
Source reference: p. 4, 7External administrative disclosures from other universities do not override specific government service classifications and pay matrices applicable to the respondent institution
Source reference: p. 6-7Reasoning
The court found that the petitioner failed to substantiate his claim that "Machine Man" is a Class-III post
Source reference: p. 7Analysis of the evidence showed that the petitioner had been consistently paid according to Class-IV scales (6th Pay Commission band Rs. 4440-7440 and 7th Pay Commission Level IS-3)
Source reference: p. 5-7The court scrutinized the RTI documents from Saurashtra University provided by the petitioner but noted they distinguished between "Franking Machine Operators" (higher pay) and "Duplicating Machine Men" (lower pay/IS-3 category), with the latter aligning with the petitioner's actual pay scale
Source reference: p. 7Furthermore, the State’s Resolution dated June 19, 2018, explicitly listed "Machine Man" at Sr. No. 42 of Appendix-1 as Level IS-3
Source reference: p. 7Consequently, because the University was acting in accordance with government-mandated pay levels, its request for further documentation from the petitioner was not arbitrary
Source reference: p. 6-7Holding
The court concluded that the petitioner remained unsubstantiated in his claim for Class-III status
The court held that there was no error or inadequacy in the salary or retiral dues paid by the University as they complied with the relevant Government Resolutions and service book entries
Source reference: p. 7-8The petition was dismissed, and the Rule was discharged; no costs were awarded
Source reference: p. 8Original Court PDF
VINODBHAI NANJIBHAI BABARIYAvsSTATE OF GUJARAT
Click to open original judgment
Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in