IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.14414 of 2005 NIRANJAN JHA, son of late Yukti Nath Jha, resident of village Barari, P.O. and P.S. Barari, District Bhagalpur … Petitioner Versus 1. THE RAJENDRA AGRI.UNIVERSITY through its Registrar 2. The Vice Chancellor, Rajendra Agricultural University 3. The Director, Administration, Rajendra Agricultural University 4. The Comptroller, Rajendra Agricultural University All at Pusa, P.O. and P.S. Pusa, District Samastipur 5. The University Press Manager, University Press, Tirhut College of Agriculture, Dholi, District Muzaffarpur 6. The State of Bihar 7. The Secretary, Finance Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna 8. The Agricultural Commissioner, Bihar, Patna … Respondents. ----------- 3. 30.7.2010 Heard counsel for the petitioner and the counsel for the State as also counsel for the University. The prayer of the petitioner in this writ application reads as follows: “(i) For quashing of office order No. 450 dated 13.9.2004 of Director, Administration (Annexure 6) by which offset Machine Man has been given revised pay scale of Rs. 2625-4000/-. (ii) For a further direction to the respondents to pay to the petitioner the revised pay scale of Rs. 3200-4000 as revised earlier by the University vide letter No. 2418 2 RAU dated 5.1.2000 of the Comptroller, Rajendra Agricultural University (Annexure 5). (iii) For a further direction to the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for giving him the original pay scale of revised time to time of the Offset machine man in the pay scale of Rs. 680-965 as per the advertisement dated 21st March, 1985 (Annexure 2) for which the petitioner was interviewed and selected.” With regard to the aforementioned prayer learned counsel for the petitioner at the out set did not press the prayer with regard to giving the petitioner pre-revised pay scale of Rs. 680-965 being conscious of the fact that once he had accepted the down graded pay scale of Rs. 480-680 at the time of his initial appointment he could not have asked for varying the terms of his appointment. In that view of the matter, the prayer made in paragraph 1(iii) is hereby rejected as not pressed. The petitioner’s remaining grievance with regard to fixation of his pay in the revised pay scale of Rs. 3200-4900 would require a conscious consideration and 3 decision of both the university and the State Government, inasmuch as he has a legitimate expectation that since the qualification at the entry point and job requirement of both the post of Offset Machine Man and Plate Machine Man is identical and in fact the same. Therefore and when the Plate Machine Man has been given the revised pay scale of Rs. 3200-4900 which was also recommended for the post of Offset Machine Man held by the petitioner, the Government should not have made an artificial distinction between these two posts in the matter of revision of pay scale by placing the petitioner and his post in a lower pay scale. In this regard the reliance placed by the petitioner on Annexure 2 showing the qualification for both the posts and the averments made in the writ application in paragraphs no. 24, 25 and 26 reading as follows: “24. That it is stated that in pursuance to the advertisement No. 2985, Platen Machine Man were appointed in the pay scale of Rs. 480-680 in the year 1988 itself. The petitioner was also appointed to the down graded post of Offset 4 Machine Man in the pay scale of Rs. 480-680. Later on the scale of Rs. 480-680 was revised to Rs. 950- 1400. 25. That from office order No. 2418 dated 5.1.2000 (Annexure 5) it is evident that pay scale of both the Offset Machine and Plate Machine Man were revised Rs. 950-1400 to Rs. 3200-4900 but anamole has been created vide Annexure 7 and 7A by revising the pay scale of Plate Machine Man from Rs. 950-1400 to Rs. 3050-4500 and that of Offset Machine Man Rs. 950-1400 to Rs. 2650-4000. 26. That it is stated and submitted that in the facts and circumstances of the case, the revised pay scale of Offset Machine Man and Plate Machine Man and ought to have been same and by not doing so the respondents have created anomaly in the pay scale of Offset Machine Man.” seem to have some valid ground which would require reconsideration by the State Government. In that view of the matter, this Court would give liberty to the petitioner to file a self contained representation firstly to the Director (Administration) of 5 the University alongwith the relevant documents in support of his claim and also annexing a copy of this order, whereafter the Director (Administration) on the basis of materials available in the office would make a recommendation to the State Government and if it is recommended that the Offset Machine Man would be required to be given the pay scale of Rs. 3200-4900, the Government will take its own decision strictly in accordance with law. It, however, must be made clear that the Government in the matter of fixing pay scale has to be guided by some uniform criteria and cannot create artificial distinction as has been presently alleged with regard to the pay scale of Offset Machine Man vis-à-vis Plate Machine Man. In the event the Government agrees to grant the petitioner pay scale of Rs. 3200-4900 by up- grading the pay scale of the post of Offset Machine Man, he would also be entitled to arrears and current salary and the revised scale. On the other hand, if the claim of the petitioner is rejected, the Government will be required to give reasons for the 6 same. Such exercise, however, must be completed by the respondents university and the Government within a period of six months from the date of receipt/ production of a copy of this order. With the aforementioned observation and direction, this application is disposed of. (Mihir Kumar Jha,J.) Surendra/