Case Note & Summary
The Supreme Court considered a special leave petition filed by the Food Corporation of India challenging a Division Bench order of the Calcutta High Court dated June 12, 1996 in F.M.A. No. 376 of 1992. The dispute concerned the pay scale in which deputationists were to be absorbed. The respondents, who had been working as Sub-Inspectors in the Food Department of the Government of West Bengal, were taken on deputation to the Food Corporation of India and were made to discharge duties of the post of Assistant Grade II for more than 18 years. When the Corporation considered their absorption, it sought to fit them in Assistant Grade III in terms of paragraph 7 of its circular bearing No. 9-1/87-EP (Pt.I) dated September 23, 1988. The deputationists challenged that fitment in writ petitions before the Calcutta High Court. The learned single Judge, after considering the material, found that the deputationists had rendered continuous satisfactory service for 18 years and had discharged the functions of Assistant Grade II, and it would be discriminatory to absorb them in Assistant Grade III. The single Judge set aside the impugned decision dated September 22, 1988 insofar as item No. 7 decided to absorb the writ petitioners in Assistant Grade III with effect from July 1, 1984. The Division Bench affirmed that decision and directed that the deputationists should be conferred the pay of the post of Assistant Grade II carrying the pay scale of Rs.380-640/-. The Supreme Court noted that the admitted scale of pay of Assistant Grade II was Rs.300-685/- and that the deputationists had discharged duties of Assistant Grade II for well over 18 years. The Corporation's counsel, Shri H.K. Puri, argued that since there was no equivalent post of Sub-Inspectors in the Corporation, the post carrying equivalent scale was Assistant Grade III, and therefore the fitting under paragraph 7 was not arbitrary. The Supreme Court rejected this contention. It held that having had the respondents on deputation and having absorbed them, and the respondents having discharged duties of Assistant Grade II for over 18 years, it would be highly unjust and arbitrary to deny them the scale of pay attached to Assistant Grade II. The Court found no error of law in the High Court's direction and dismissed the special leave petition.
Headnote
A) Service Law - Deputation and Absorption - Pay Fixation - Not mentioned - Deputationists employed as Sub-Inspectors in State Food Department were taken on deputation to the Corporation and discharged duties of Assistant Grade II for over 18 years. On absorption, the Corporation sought to place them in Assistant Grade III under paragraph 7 of circular No. 9-1/87-EP (Pt.I) dated 23.9.1988. The High Court set aside that fitment and directed absorption in Assistant Grade II. Held that denial of the scale of pay attached to Assistant Grade II would be highly unjust and arbitrary. B) Administrative Law - Arbitrary and Discriminatory Fitment - Equivalence of Posts - Not mentioned - The Corporation contended that no equivalent post of Sub-Inspector existed in its cadre and therefore Assistant Grade III, carrying equivalent scale, was the appropriate fitment. The Supreme Court rejected this contention, reasoning that actual duties discharged for over 18 years as Assistant Grade II could not be ignored. Held that absorption in Assistant Grade III was discriminatory and fitment in Assistant Grade II scale was correctly directed.
Issue of Consideration
Whether deputationists who worked as Assistant Grade II for over 18 years on deputation were entitled to absorption in Assistant Grade II pay scale or could be fitted in Assistant Grade III under paragraph 7 of the Corporation circular dated 23.9.1988.
Final Decision
The Supreme Court dismissed the special leave petition, affirming the High Court's direction that the deputationists were entitled to be absorbed in the scale of pay attached to the post of Assistant Grade II.
Law Points
- Deputationists who actually discharge duties of a higher post for long years cannot be absorbed in a lower scale
- fitment on absorption must consider actual duties performed
- not just equivalent parent cadre scale
- denial of scale attached to the post actually held would be highly unjust and arbitrary.
