IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.1389 of 2001 MOHAN SINGH Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS ----------- 3/ 28/8/2008. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. The petitioner was appointed as a Steno Typist in the Bihar State Food Civil Supplies Corporation, a class-3 post and was promoted to the post of Personal Assistant in the Corporation on 7.11.1983. A policy decision was then taken by the State Government on 31.3.1997 for appointment by absorption of Class-3 employees including that of the Corporation, in the State Consumer Forums. This policy decision inter alia stated that the pay scale of a person in the Corporation shall be protected and in any event he shall not be granted a scale lower than that he was getting in the Corporation. The petitioner having exercised his option was released when he joined as a personal assistant in the Consumer Forum at Muzaffarpur by order dated 7.4.1997. Orders were then issued by the District Magistrate, Muzaffarpur which, it is submitted on behalf of the petitioner, was in consonance with the - 2 - policy decision of 31.3.1997 fixing his pay scale as a personal assistant in Rs.5500-9000/- from the date of his joining. Thereafter followed an order of the State Government in the Department of Food and Civil Supplies dated 19.10.2000 that there was no sanctioned post of personal assistant in the Consumer Forum, but that only the post of Steno-typist was sanctioned. The pay-scale of the sanctioned post was only Rs.4000-6000/- and, therefore, the grant of any higher scale was not in consonance with law. Records were therefore called for verification. At this stage the Chairman of the District Consumer Forum, Muzaffarpur on 29.11.2000 wrote to the Secretary, Food and Civil Supplies, Government of Bihar that, in fact, the post of personal assistant in the Consumer Forum was a sanctioned post and, therefore, there was no illegality in the order of the District Magistrate dated 13.3.2000 granting the scale of Rs.5500-9000/- to the petitioner. Subsequently followed another Government decision in the Department of Food and Civil Supplies dated 21.12.2000 that the - 3 - matter was under examination by the Government as in some districts the scale of Rs.4000- 6000/- was being granted to personal assistants while in some it was Rs.5500-9000/- and in one case Rs.6500-10000/. It was therefore directed that till the issue was resolved, the pay scale of Rs.4000-6000/-, as determined to be the sanctioned scale by order dated 19.10.2000 was to be paid. Mr. Shahi, appearing for the petitioner submits that the fact that the post of personal assistant was a sanctioned post is more than apparent from the letter of the Chairman of the District Consumer Forum appended to the writ petition which the counter affidavit does not deny. That there could have been no absorption unless the posts had been sanctioned in the newly created consumer forum because of which a decision was taken to make appointments by absorption. Unfortunately Mr. Shahi is not in a position to inform this Court further what ultimate final decision has been taken in the matter. The counter affidavit of the respondents filed in the year-2001 is hardly of any help. - 4 - Reliance on an earlier order in Anexure-A of the counter affidavit is misconceived as this Court on 12.3.2001 declined to interfere noticing that the matter was under consideration with the Government. Learned counsel for the State is also not in a position to apprise this Court of any final decision taken in the matter and seven years later to adjourn this matter to be taken up again several years later shall serve no purpose. This writ application is, therefore, disposed with the directions:- (a) If the Government has not taken any decision in the matter, in absence of any denial to the letter of the Chairman of the District Consumer Forum that the post was sanctioned, this Court holds that it is only after the post had been sanctioned that a pay- scale with decisions for appointment by absorption came to be taken.. There can, therefore, be no justification for curtailment of the pay-scale of the petitioner to below that which he was drawing as a personal assistant in the corporation on the date of - 5 - absorption and it shall include the revised scale of the same; (b) If a final decision has been taken in the matter by the State Government, of which both the parties are unaware, the matter shall abide by such final decision and if the petitioner is aggrieved by the same, it shall be his liberty to question the same before the appropriate forum in an appropriate manner. The writ application is disposed in the aforesaid terms. KC ( Navin Sinha,J )