Saytabrata Sinha, J.@mdashThis application is directed against an order dated 8.5.98 passed by the West Bengal Administrative Tribunal in O.A. 367 of 1996, whereby and whereunder the application filed by the petitioner herein was dismissed. The petitioners case was that they were working as Bengali Translators. They were originally appointed in the scale of pay of Rs. 375/- -650/- which in terms of recommendation of ROPA Rules, 1981 has been revised to Rs. 425 - 1050/- with an initial start of Rs. 455/-. Such higher initial start however, bad not been granted in respect of Sub-Divisional information and Cultural Officers who were getting the scale of Rs. 425/- 1050/- only.
2. Before the learned Tribunal, the petitioners prayed reliefs, inter alia for revision of their scale of pay. It was held - "We have considered the submissions of both the parties and also considered the materials on record Admittedly, the Bengali Translators were appointed through Public Service Commission in the year 1987 only, whereas, the officers belonging so subordinate Information Service Grade 11 have been inducted in service long back. Nature of duties discharged by the Sub-Divisional Information & Cultural Officers cannot he compared to those of the functions of the petitioners who operate their duties in a limited area and hence the application of principle of "equal pay for equal work" in this regard appears to be misconception. Government have the power to upgrade the scale of pay of any group of people considering the work load entrusted from time to time and unless there is any hostile discrimination amongst same group. no benefit can be claimed on the ground of equality in pay."
3. However, it does not appear on what basis the aforementioned finding had been arrived at. There cannot, however, be any doubt whatsoever that the Court cannot fix scale of pay and the same has to be done by an expert body. If an expert body like Pay Revision Committee. has already gone into the matter, the only remedy available to the petitioner would be to bring the anomaly, if any. to the notice of the State Government who may consider the same on its own merit.
4. We. therefore, are of the opinion that the petitioners may file an appropriate representation before an appropriate authority for redressal of their grievances and it will be open to the said authority to consider the matter on its own merit. It is expected that such representation may be considered at an early date and preferably within a period of three months from the date of filing the same. We. however, make it clear that we have not gone into the merit of the matter.
5. This application is allowed to the aforementioned extent without any order as to costs. Urgent xerox certified copy of this order if applied for. may be supplied on priority basis.
M.H.S. Ansari, J.
I agree
