Affidavit of service filed in Court today be kept with the record.
There are 59 petitioners. The petitioner nos.1 to 42 are in service Pilots in Shyama Prasad Mookerjee Port, Kolkata, (formerly known as Kolkata Port
Trust). The petitioner nos.43 to 57 are superannuated Pilots. The petitioner nos.58 and 59, are the family pensioners and/or legal heirs of the
deceased Pilots. The petitioners say that the Pilots were initially in the pay scale of Rs.14,500 â€" 18,700. This pay scale was upgraded to
Rs.16,000 â€" 20,800 with effect from 31st December, 2006. There was also a revision in the pay scale of the Pilots which was revised to 32,900 â€
58,000. The benefit of the revision was notionally given effect to from 1.1.2007 and the actual payments were made from September, 2010. The pay
scale of Pilots has been fixed at Rs.80,000 â€" 2,20,000 with effect from 1.1.2017. The pay scale of the Pilots have now been sought to be fixed at
29,100 â€" 54,500 instead of upgraded and revised pay scale of Rs.32,900 â€" 58,000. There will as such be reduction in the pay scale the benefits of
which have been enjoyed by the Pilots. The petitioners say that the upgradation and revision of pay scale respectively with effect from 31.12.2006 and
01.01.2007 was after concurrence of the Shyama Prasad Mookerjee Port Trust (then known as Kolkata Port Trust), the Ministry of Shipping under
which the said Shyama Prasad Mookerjee Port Trust functions as also Ministry of Finance. After such approval by accepting the recommendation of
the Pay Revision Commission (in short PRC), the respondents now cannot revisit the issue and resile out their commitment by reducing the pay scale
of the Pilots fixed with effect from 1.1.2007 and recover the excess payments, if any, on the basis of the upgraded and revised pay scale from the
Pilots. The petitioners have referred to a letter dated 1st June, 2021 written by the Under Secretary to the Government of India, Ministry of Ports,
Shipping and Waterways (PHRD Division) addressed to the Chairperson of All Major Port Trusts including that of the respondent no.1 and to the
Chief Administrative Officer, Indian Ports Association. By referring to the letter, the petitioners have tried to impress upon the Court that DoE has
given its opinion by not agreeing to the upgradation and revision of pay scale of the Pilots in Shyama Prasad Mookerjee Port, Kolkata that took place
on 31.12.2006 and 1.1.2007. Certain details have been also sought for in the letter from All Major Port Trusts with regard to the previous pay scale of
the Pilots and as to whether such pay scale was higher than the pay scale now recommended for, i.e., 29,100 â€" 54,500. The letter also invites
proposal from Indian Ports Association for a suitable plan for recovery of overpayments to the Pilots. The petitioners further say that for Pilots who
have joined the services of respondent no.1 from 2013, the pay scale is 32,900 â€" 58,000. This pay scale is, however, not proposed to be reduced to
29,100 â€" 54,500 as has been recommended for the Pilots who have joined prior to 2013. This is likely to cause further anomaly in the pay and
allowances receivable by the Pilots who have joined service prior to 2013 with those who have joined after 2013 though they perform the same job
and share the same responsibilities. The petitioners, therefore, at this stage seek an interim order in aid of the final orders claimed by restraining the
respondents and each one of them from recovering any amount which according to the said respondents have been overpaid and/or overdrawn by the
petitioners for enjoying higher scale than that of Rs.29,100 â€" Rs.54,500/- as also restricting the respondents and each one of them to fit in the
petitioners to the pay scale 29,100 â€" 54,500 against the upgraded and revised pay scale of 32,900 â€" 58,000 effective from 1.1.2007 which has now
been revised to 80,000 â€" 2,20,000 with effect from 01.01.2017. The petitioners also referred to a judgment passed by a learned Single Judge of this
Court in W.P. No.1128 of 2016 (Dr. Aminul Islam Khan and Ors. Vs. Board of Trustees for the Port of Kolkata & Ors.) on 16th September, 2020.
Referring to the said judgment, it is submitted by the petitioners that in respect of other Class-I officers of the respondent no.1 other than the Pilots,
the recovery of excess payments due to similar reduction in the pay scale has been quashed and/or set aside. The said judgment and order is,
however, under challenge in an appeal, which is pending consideration.
On behalf of the respondent no.1, it is submitted that the said respondent has to abide by the directions given by the Ministry of Shipping and Ministry
of Finance. The respondent no.1 is duty bound to furnish the particulars sought for in the letter dated 1st June, 2021 unless the Court restrains the said
respondent from doing so. The respondent no.1 further submits that the upgradation and revision of pay scale was as per the direction of the Ministry
of Shipping and the Ministry of Finance. The respondent no.1 had implemented such upgradation and revision. The respondent no.1 has to abide by the
directions given by the Ministry of Shipping and Ministry of Finance for placing the Pilots in the pay scale 29,100 â€" 54,500 as directed after revisiting
the upgradation and revision that took place on 31.12.2006 and 1.1.2007.
On behalf of the respondent nos.2 and 3, it is submitted that the judgment in Dr. Aminul Islam Khan (supra) has no manner of application in the
present case. That apart and in any event before passing any order, this Court should await for the result of the appeal preferred against the said
judgment.
After considering the submissions of the respective parties and the materials on record, it appears that the matter can be finally adjudicated only after
calling for affidavits. However, till the writ petition is finally heard and disposed of on affidavits, the petitioners are entitled to an interim protection
otherwise the writ petition will become infructuous. If the recovery of alleged excess payments is made from the petitioners or the petitioner nos.1 to
57 and the predecessor-in-interest, the petitioner nos.58 and 59 are fitted to the pay scale 29,100 â€" 54,500, instead of Rs.32,900 â€" Rs.58,000 the
wit petition will become infructuous. The petitioners have been able to make out a prima facie case. The balance of convenience and inconvenience is
also in favour of the petitioners and against the respondents for passing an interim order.
In the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the respondent nos.1, 2 and 3 and each one of them are restrained by an order of injunction till the disposal
of the writ petition or until further orders whichever is earlier from recovering any alleged excess payments or overdrawn amount from the petitioners.
The respondent nos.1, 2 and 3 and each one of them are further restrained by an order of injunction from placing the petitioner nos.1 to 57 and
predecessor-in-interest of the petitioner nos.58 and 59 in the pay scale 29,100 â€" 54,500 from their upgraded and revised pay scale of Rs.32,900 â€
RS.58,000/- given effect to respectively on 31st December, 2006 and 1st January, 2007 till disposal of the writ petition or until further orders
whichever is earlier.
Let affidavit-in-opposition be filed within a period of four weeks from date; reply thereto, if any, within three weeks thereafter. Liberty to mention for
inclusion of the writ petition under the heading ‘For Hearing’ after nine weeks.
