BASUDEV PATIversusSTATE OF ORISSA AND ANR.

-                               BASUDEV PATI
                                        v.
                         STATE OF ORISSA AND ANR.
                                                                                 A



                               ' MARCH 3, 1997

                [K. RAMASWAMY AND G.T. NANAVATI, JJ.]                            B

          Service Law:

           Protection i:Jf pa?Lecturer in U.G.C. pay scale-Selection to Orissa
    Administrative Service-Pay scales of Lecturer and Orissa Administrative
                                                                                 c
    Service Class II being similar i.e. Rs. 525-1150--::Z,ater U.G.C. revised.scale
    of pay of Lecturer to Rs. 700-1600 with retrospective effect-Pay of appellant
    fv:ed at Rs. 780 as a 'lecturer-After his .selection to Orissa Administrative
    Service appellant claiming protection of his last pay drawn and his upgraded
    fitment in the pay scale in Orissa Administrative Service-Held, claim not
    maintainable-The service as a Lecturer is entirely different from the service D
    of Orissa Administrative Service-Merely because appellant happened to work
    earlier as a Lecturer and in the same pay scale which was subsequently
    revised, he cannot be pennitted to have the benefit of U.G.C. scale in the
    Administrative Service and fitment in the pay scale 011 that basis.
'
         CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Special Leave Petition (C)                E
    No. 4084 of 1997.

          From the Judgment ahd Order dated 6.12.96 of the Orissa Ad-
                                                                                      '
    ministrative Tribunal, Cuttack in T.A. No 610 of 1987.
                                              1
                                              •




          Janaranjan Das, K. N. Tripathy and D. Mohanty for the Petitioner.
                                                                                 F

          The following Order of the Court was delivered :

         This special leave petition is filed against the order of the Orissa
    Administrative Tribunal at Cuttack passed on December 6, 1996, in Trans-
    fer Application No. 610/87.
                                                                                G

          Admittedly, the petitioner, while working as a Lecturer, had ap-
    peared in competitive examination and was selected to the Orissa Ad-
    ministrative Service. As Orissa Administrative Service, Class-II, his scale
    of pay was Rs. 525-1150. Earlier, also when he worked as Lecturer, the H
                                      637
      638                   SUPREME COURT REPORTS                   (1997] 2 S.C.R.
                                                                                      ...
A scale of pay was Rs. 525-1150 which was subsequently revised by the
      University Grants Commission w.e.f April 1, 1974 to Rs. 700-1600. In that
      pay scale, his pay fixed at Rs. 780. He was paid arrears of salary with
      retrospective effect from 1.1.1974. After he was selected and appointed to
      the Orissa Administrative Service, he sought protection of his last drawn
      pay and his upgraded fitment in the pay scale in the Orissa Administrative
.B
      Service. The Tribunal has rejected the claim. Thus this special leave
      petition.

             Shri Janaranjan Das, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner,
      contends that since the petitioner had been given the pay scale with
 c,   ~etrospective effect from 1.1.1974, on his appointment to the Orissa Ade
      niinistrative Service, his last drawn pay need to be protected. As per the
      instructions of the Accountant General, his pay is entitled to be fixed at
      Rs. 780 in the pay scale in the service of Orissa Administrative Service. We
      find no force in the contention. The service as a Lecturer is entirely
      different from the service of the Orissa Administrative Service. Merely
 D    because he happened to work earlier as a Lecturer and in the same pay '
      scale which was subsequently revised, he cannot be permitted to have the
      benefit of U.G.C. scale in the Administrative Service and fitment in the
      pay-scale on that basis. That would create imbalance and gross infraction
      and distortion and would result in flood of claims of similarly situated
 E    person under Article 39(d} of the Constitution. Under these circumstances,
      such a course cannot be permitted· to b~ adopted.

             The special leave petition is dismissed accordingly.

      R.P.                                                     Petition dismissed.



                                                                                            J