IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA C.W.J.C. No.17465 of 2008 Sita Ram Singh, son of late Rambilash Singh, resident of village Baghuain P.S. Narayanpur, district Bhojpur, presently posted as Assistant Teacher at Middle Narayanpur (Agiaon Block), Bhojpur, Arrah Versus 1. The State of Bihar through Principal Secretary, Human Resources Department, Bihar, Patna 2. The Director, Primary Education, Bihar, Patna 3. the Principal Secretary, Finance Department, Government of Bihar 4. The District Magistrate, Bhojpur, Arrah, Bihar 5. The District Superintendent of Education, Bhojpur, Bihar 6. The Block Education Extension Officer, Bihiya, Bhojpur 7. The Range Education Officer, Bihiya, Bhojpur, Ara 8. The District Accounts Officer, Bhojpur, Ara .. Respondents **** /4/ 21.07.2009 Heard the counsel for the petitioner and the State. 2. Petitioner has filed this application for quashing the order, contained in Memo No. 775, dated 17.09.2008, Letter No. 3785, dated 12.05.2008, and Letter No. 776, dated 13.08.2003, whereby his pay scale has been reduced to Rs.1290/- in place of Rs.1470/- as on 05.05.1986. Petitioner was appointed as Assistant teacher on 08.05.1986 in the B.Sc. trained scale. He was appointed in the pay scale of Rs.730- 15-820-980 and joined in the Middle School, Kaithar Khurd (Rajpur Block). The pay scale of the Government employees was revised by Government‟s Resolution No. 6022, dated 2 18.12.1989. In this resolution different revised pay scales were provided for different categories of employees. Clause 8 of the Resolution related to the Assistant Teachers, who were appointed on 01.01.1986 or in between 01.01.1986 and 18.12.1989. The provision was that whoever in Government service on 01.01.1986 their fixation of pay shall be made in the revised scale of pay in accordance with Schedule III in Clause I. The present emoluments will be added a sum equivalent to 35% of the basic pay in the existing scale subject to a minimum of Rs.175/- and maximum of Rs.700/-. Counsel for the petitioner submits that similar issue was raised by one Shiva Kant Jha in C.W.J.C. No. 8333 of 1999 which was allowed by order, dated 29.07.2004. A long discussion was made so far the resolution of the Government is concerned and Clause 8 of the Resolution was also discussed and finally it was held that the persons who have been appointed on or after 1st January, 1986, but, before issuance of order, i.e., 18.12..1989, it would be deemed that their appointment has been made in the revised scale subject to the provision made in subsequent paragraphs of the said Resolution. “According to this clause the persons who have 3 been appointed on or after 1st January, 1986, but before issue of the orders i.e. 18.12.1989 it would be deemed that their appointments have been made in the revised scale subject to the provisions made in subsequent paragraphs of the said Resolution. Schedule III is in relation to fixation of pay in the revised scale. It says that fixation of pay of Government servants both gazetted and non- gazetted, who were in services on 1.1.1986 shall be made in the revised scale pay at a stage to be determined in accordance with Schedule-III. Clause 1 says that the present emoluments will be worked out as on 1st January, 1986 and will include (1) the basic pay on 1.1.1986 and (2) D.A./ad hoc D.A. admissible at index average 608. Paragraph 2 says that to the „present emoluments‟ will be added a sum equivalent to 35% of the basic pay in the existing scale subject to a minimum of Rs.175 and maximum of Rs.700. According to paragraph -3, the total of „present emoluments‟ and the „additional sum‟ will be called „Pre-Fixation Emoluments‟. Paragraph 4 says that the „Pre- Fixation Emoluments‟ will be fitted in the revised scale of pay as provided in paragraph 4. From Annexure 8 it would appear that the petitioner was appointed in the scale of Rs.730-1080; on the date of his fixation of pay, his D.A. as admissible on 1.1.1986 on 608 points index average was 394.20. Adding the above two, his salary was Rs.1124.20. 4 This would be the „present emoluments‟ to which „additional sum‟ at 35% is to be added which would come down to 255.50. The petitioner‟s total emoluments for the purposes of pay fixation would be Rs.1379.70, the round of which would be Rs.1380. To this the benefit of three increments is to be added in accordance with paragraph 6 of Schedule-III of the said Resolution. Paragraph-6 says that after fixation of pay in the revised scale with effect from 1.1.1986, to this is to be added the benefit of three increments. Paragraph-6 says that after fixation of pay in the revised scale with effect from 1.1.1986 three increments will be allowed to the Intermediate untrained/Intermediate trained/Graduate untrained teachers who get their pay fixed in the scale of Rs.1200-2040 in revised scales. Each increment would be Rs.30 as is clear from Schedule-I. to the total amount of Rs.1380 three increments of Rs.30 each totaling to Rs. 90 is to be added and the s alary of the petitioner would be Rs.1470 as on 20.04.1988.” 3. I find that case of this petitioner is fully covered by the decision, discussed above, impugned orders have been passed by the respondents ignoring the law already settled by this Court in Shiva Kant Jha‟s case. Petitioner‟ salary would not have been reduced to Rs.1290 on 08.05.1986 rather it had rightly been fixed as Rs.1470/- and it should not be disturbed. 5 The impugned orders, contained in Memo No. 775, dated 17.09.2008, Letter No. 3785, dated 12.05.2008, and Letter No. 776, dated 13.08.2003, are quashed. 4. This application is allowed. Cp:2/S.A. (Mridula Mishra, J.)