IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.7251 of 2002 SMT.MANORAMA DEVI W/o Shri Kapildeo Singh, Resident of village- Dillu Bigha, P.O Barnousa, District Nalanda Versus 1. BIHAR STATE SOCIAL WELFARE Advisory Board through its Chairman, Barrack No. 9 A Old Secretariat Patna 2. The Chairman, BIHAR STATE SOCIAL WELFARE Advisory Board, Barrack No. 9 A Old Secretariat Patna 3. The State of Bihar through its Commissioner-cum- Secretary, Social Welfare Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna 4. The Finance Commissioner, Govt. of Bihar, Patna 5. The Chairman, Family and Child Welfare Project, Bakhtiarpur, Patna ----------- CWJC No.12615 of 2002 SOCIAL WELFARE EMPLOYEES UNION, Bihar State Social Welfare Advisory Board through its Secretary, Dharamjeet Singh S/o Shri Parmeshwar Singh, registered office situated at Fatuha, P.S Fatuha, District Patna Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR through its Chief Secretary, Govt. of Bihar, Patna 2. The Secretary, Welfare Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna 3. Secretary, Finance Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna 4. BIHAR STATE SOCIAL WELFARE Advisory Board through its Chairman, Barrack No. 9 A Old Secretariat Patna 5. The Central social Welfare Board through its Chairman, Samaj Kalyan Bhawan, B/12, Tara Crescent Institutional Area, New Delhi- 110016 ----------- For the petitioners: Anil Kumar Jha, Advocate For the State: Mr. Braj Kishore Prasad Sinha, GP 3 For the Board : Mr. Anand Mohan Verma, Advocate ----------- 9 10-02-2009 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned counsel for the State and learned counsel for the State Social Welfare Advisory Board (hereinafter referred to as the State Board). In CWJC no. 12615/2002 the prayer of petitioner is to direct the State Government to meet the financial liability on account of the decision of the State Board, the employer of petitioners, to grant Central pay scale to the employees of the State Board w.e.f. 1.1.1996, the date since when such benefit was granted by the State Government to its own - 2 - employees. The monetary benefit of the Central pay scale granted to the employees of the State Government is said to be w.e.f. 1.4.1997. In CWJC no. 7251/2002 also the prayer is to grant difference of salary for the period 1996 to 2002 on account of grant of central pay. On behalf of the petitioners reliance has been placed upon a judgement of the Division Bench contained in annexure-1 to CWJC no. 12615/2002 whereby the State Government was directed to provide necessary funds within three months to meet the liability of the State Board with regard to revised pay scale of its employees as per recommendation of the 4th Pay Revision Committee which had been accepted in respect of employees of the State Government. Reliance was also placed upon annexure -2 to CWJC no. 12615/2002, a judgement of a Single Judge of this court whereby the State Government was directed to make necessary funds available to the State Board for implementing the decision of State Board to pay revised pay scale as per recommendation of the 5th Pay Revision Committee w.e.f. 1.1.1986. On behalf of State of Bihar it has been submitted that a writ petition filed by an employee of the State Board claiming pension and gratuity was dismissed by a Single Judge and the judgement was confirmed by the Division Bench by holding that the State Board is an independent legal entity and its employees are not the employees of the State Government and there was no liability upon the State Government to make funds available for such demands by an employee of the State Board. It was also noticed by the Division Bench in its judgement contained in annexure-B to the counter affidavit in CWJC no. - 3 - 12615/2002 that no legal provision could be shown to give pensionary benefits to the employees of the State Board. On behalf of the petitioners it was replied that there is no dispute with the legal proposition that employees of the State Board are not the employees of the State Government and it is the State Board which is competent to decide the service condition of its employees but in the past till the State Board’s two projects were stopped w.e.f. 2002 and 2003 respectively, the State Government had always accepted its liability to meet the cost of project employees of Family Child Welfare Project up to 100% since creation of State Board around 1960. Only the employees of the Welfare Extension Project were paid to the extent of 66% by the State Board and the remaining percentage of expenses was borne by the Central Board. The payment to employees of Welfare Extension Project was on the basis of approval granted by the Central Board. So far as employees of the headquarter of the State Board are concerned admittedly, the payment was made by the Central Board and the State Government in equal proportion. It was also submitted on the basis of discussions made in annexures 1 and 2 of CWJC no. 12615/2002, the earlier judgements, that in principle the State Government had always agreed to bear the expenses to the extent of its liability whenever revision of pay scale was required to be done on account of similar revision of pay scale granted to State Government employees. Hence, according to learned counsel for the petitioners when the State Government extended the benefit of central pay scale to its own employees w.e.f. 1.1.1996 with monetary benefits w.e.f. 1.4.1997, the - 4 - State Board adopted the same benefits for its own employees both of the headquarter and the projects and through annexures 4 and 5 to CWJC no. 12615/2002, both dated 28.11.01, had requested the Central Board as well as the State Government to accept and approve the decision so that payments could be made to the employees of the State Board in central pay scale. Admittedly, the Central Board or the State Government have not given their approval so far to the proposal of the State Board. From the relevant facts it is obvious that State Government has now closed the projects of State Board and the project employees of the State Board as well as its headquarter employees are now claiming only monetary benefits by way of difference of pay by seeking direction upon the State Government to make available funds so that central pay scale benefits may be given to such employees of the State Board w.e.f due date. In fact the amount will be only the difference on the basis of two different pay scales. Since in the past the State Government has always accepted its liability for payment to headquarter employees up to 50 %, for Family Child Welfare Project up to 100% and to Welfare Extension Projects up to 66% and it has always in the past accepted revision of pay scale for the employees of the State Board as accepted for State Government employees, the decision of the Board seeking approval for payment of central pay scale to its eligible employees cannot be faulted with. It is based upon legitimate expectations and consistent past conduct. There is no reasonable basis for the State Government to refuse its financial liability to the extent it has borne such liabilities in the past. If the - 5 - Central Board has not accorded its approval and has not met its own share of the expenses, it should take a fair and appropriate decision forthwith else the aggrieved employees may have to seek their remedy against the Central Board. So far as the State Government is concerned, it is directed to meet its share of financial liabilities in respect of different categories of State Board employees as per past practice so that such employees including those who are no longer in employment may get the monetary benefits of difference of pay as per central pay scale without any delay. Some employees of the State Board are said to be still in service. It goes without saying that they will also be entitled to the same benefits as the project employees who are no longer in service. The requisite funds to meet the State’s liability in the proportion in which such expenses were met by the State Government in the past, should be made available to the State Board within four months from the date of production/communication of a copy of this order. The claim of the petitioner in CWJC No. 7251/2002 as an employee of State Board for the difference of salary on account of central pay scale for the period since 1996 is also allowed in accordance with the judgement and directions given above in connection with writ petition of Social Welfare Employees Union. Both the writ petitions are allowed to the aforesaid extent. BKS/ (Shiva Kirti Singh,J.)