IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC NO.7828 OF 2007 RAMJEE RAM,S/O LATE RAMDEO RAM, AT JAMAULI, P.S RAJPUR, DISTRICT BUXAR. …………………PETITIONER. VERSUS 1.THE STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH ITS COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE, GOVT. OF BIHAR, PATNA. 2.THE DISTRICT COMPASSIONATE APPOINTMENT COMMITTEE THROUGH ITS CHAIRMAN, BHOJPUR (ARA)/BUXAR. 3.THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, BHOJPUR(ARA) BUXAR. 4.THE DISTRICT ACCOUNTS OFFICER, BHOJPUR(ARA). 5.THE CIVIL SURGEON CUM CHIEF MEDICAL OFFICER, BHOJPUR(ARA)BUXAR. 6.THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT, SUB- DIVISIONAL HOSPITAL, BUXAR. 7.INCHARGE MEDICAL OFFICER, ADDL. PRIMARY HEALTH CENTRE, MANOHARPUR, BHOJPUR(ARA) BUXAR. 8.INCHARGE MEDICAL OFFICER, PRIMARY HEALTH CENTRE, RAJPUR, BUXAR. ………………………RESPONDENTS. ----------- 02/ 23.09.2011 Heard counsel for the parties. The petitioner in this writ application seeks a direction to the respondents for revision of his pay fixation statement on the ground that though the petitioner was appointed on the post of health worker(swasthya karyakarta) but his salary has been fixed in the pay scale of Dresser(paridhapak). Counsel for the petitioner, in this regard has explained that the appointment 2 of the petitioner was made on compassionate ground and the District Compassionate Appointment Committee in its recommendation dated 06.07.1989 had recommended for appointment of the petitioner on the post of family health worker(pariwar kalyan karyakarta) and as such the Civil Surgeon while issuing the order of appointment of the petitioner on 04.09.1989 had initially appointed him on the post of health worker but later on the same was amended by changing the post of health worker to paridhapak(dresser). He has further submitted that it is on account of this reason that even though the petitioner has continued to work as a health worker, but his salary fixation has been made treating him to be the holder of the post of dresser (paridahapak). Counsel for the petitioner, however, is not in a position to inform this Court as to what was the revised pay scale of health worker and his limited explanation is that at the time of appointment in the year 1989 both the posts of Paridhapak and Swasthya karyakarta had the same pay scale of Rs. 535-765/- and 3 therefore, if later on the post of swasthya karyakarta (health worker) had been given a higher pay scale in comparison to the post of paridhapak (dresser), the petitioner automatically would be entitled for such higher pay scale and therefore the respondents have committed an error in fixing his salary in the pay scale of Rs. 2650-4000/-which is the actual replacement pay scale of Rs. 825-1200/-. In the considered opinion of this Court the issue could have been easily decided if the counsel for the State could have filed the counter affidavit. Counsel for the State has however come out with an explanation that whatever statement of fact was received by him was totally insufficient and did not clarify the main issue and the further query made by him has not been answered as yet by the respondents. As a matter of fact in the matter of fixation of pay or revision thereof, the Authorities will be guided primarily by the fact of the post held by the petitioner prior to such revision. Such post will be the post on which the 4 appointment of the petitioner was made. Curiously the appointment letter shows a cutting and replacement of the word “Swasthya karyakarta” with “Paridhapak”. It is therefore, not clear as the petitioner was appointed on the post of swasthya karyakarta or paridhapak, inasmuch as, a recommendation of the District Compassionate Appointment Committee cannot be said to be binding on the Civil Surgeon and the appointment can always be made by the Civil Surgeon on any vacant post irrespective of the recommendation made by the District Compassionate Appointment Committee. In that view of the matter, this Court would direct the Civil Surgeon of Buxar district to examine the claim of the petitioner and if he would find that actually the appointment of the petitioner was made on the post of swasthya karyakarta and he has remained working only on that post and not on the post of paridhapak, he may pass an appropriate order for refixation of the pay scale of the petitioner on the post of swasthya 5 karyakarta but if on the other hand, it is found that the petitioner’s appointment was made only on the post of paridhapak and he has discharged the function only of the post of Paridhapak, his payment of salary and its refixation will be made only in the pay scale of Paridhapak. The Civil Surgeon, Buxar in this regard must take his independent decision 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. Ranjan (Mihir Kumar Jha, J.)