1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(S) No.5639 of 2015 1. Dr. Rekha Roy 2. Kumar Shailaj Prakash 3. Dr. Archana Singh 4. Dr. Geeta Mehta 5. Arvind Kumar 6. Pankaj Kumar Verma 7. Dr. Malti Kumari 8. Raj Kishore Munda 9. Dr. Sujit Kumar Mishra 10. Dr. Anjali Singh ..... Petitioners Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand.
2. The Director, RINPAS, Kanke, Ranchi.
3. The Chairman, RINPAS-cum-Commissioner, South Chhotanagpur, Ranchi.
4. The Principal Secretary, Department of Health, Medical Education and Family Welfare, Govt. of Jharkhand, Ranchi. …. Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE H.C. MISHRA For the Petitioners : Mr. Sudershan Shrivastava, Advocate Mr. M.B. Lal, Advocate For the State : J.C. to AAG For the Respondent No.1 & 2 : Mr. Saurav Arun, Advocate ----- 4/1.09.2016 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned counsel for the respondent State as also learned counsel for the Ranchi Institute of Neuro Psychiatry and Allied Sciences (hereinafter referred to as 'RINPAS').
2. Petitioners are working as Psychiatric Social Workers in RINPAS after being appointed on the post, in the pay scale of Rs.6,500-10,500/- (unrevised) and presently, there are working in the PB-II of Rs.9,300-34,800/- with Gr. pay of Rs.4,200/-.
3. Petitioners' case is that in view of the Notification dated 15 th March 2005 issued by the State Government in its Department of Health, Medical Education and Family Welfare, as contained in Annexure–3 to the writ application, the officers and employees of RINPAS are treated to be the Government servants. It is the case of the petitioners that the pay scales of the petitioners were at par with the Senior Grade–II officers of the State Government, whose pay scale was also fixed by the Fitment Committee of the 5th PRC in the pay scale of Rs.6,500- 10,500/- (unrevised), and the State Government in its Finance Department, by its Resolution as contained in memo No.3589 dated 17.12.2007, brought on record as Annexure-4 to the writ application, has placed them in the pay scale of Rs.8,000-13,500/-. As such, the petitioners are claiming the same pay scale as granted to Senior Grade-II Officers of the State Government, by filing the present writ application.
4. A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the RINPAS, in which the Minutes of the 50th Management Committee Meeting of RINPAS, held on 2 22.5.2015, has been brought on record, in which there is mention about the Agenda of 49th Management Committee Meeting held on 14.8.2014. In the said Minutes, it is stated as follows: “NIMHANS is below RINPAS Scales. However, it is pertinent to mention at the time of creation of post, the pay scales of Psychiatric Social Worker and Medical Officer was same. Medical Officers scales were revised (Rs.8,000-13,500) by the State Govt. But as the post of Psychiatric Social Worker is no where except at RINPAS, their pay scale could not be revised after revision of pay scale of Medical Officer.”
5. Placing reliance on this minute of 50th Management Committee Meeting, brought on record by way of counter affidavit by the respondent RINPAS, learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the minute clearly shows that at the time of creation of post, the pay scales of Psychiatric Social Workers and Medical Officer were the same, i.e. Rs.6,500-10,500/-(unrevised). The scales of Medical Officers were revised to Rs.8,000-13,500/- by the State Government, but no decision was taken with regard to the post of Psychiatric Social Workers. Learned counsel accordingly, submitted that on this ground alone, the petitioners, who at one point of time, were at par with the Medical Officers in RINPAS in the same pay scale of Rs.6,500-10,500/-(unrevised) and have not been given the benefits of enhancement of pay scale to Rs.8,000-13,500/-, even though, the pay scale of the Medical Officers were enhanced, are also entitled to the same benefits. It has been submitted that there is no reason for denying the same to the Psychiatric Social Workers.
6. Learned counsel for the Respondent RINPAS on the other hand has submitted that the petitioners are not entitled to the enhancement of the pay scale to Rs.8,000-13,500/-, in view of the fact that the pay scale is fixed by the State Government. It is submitted that the pay scale of the petitioners could not be enhanced to Rs.8,000-13,500/- in absence of any decision by the State Government in this regard. Learned counsel has also opposed the prayer of the petitioner on other grounds also, but the fact remains that there is no decision on the point, as to when at the time of creation of the post, the posts of Psychiatric Social Workers were treated to be at par with the Medical Officers, why the same is not being treated at par for the present.
7. Learned counsel for the State has also opposed the prayer of the petitioners submitting that the Resolution of the State Government, in its Finance Department dated 17.12.2007 as contained in Annexure–4 to the writ application, clearly states that the State Government had decided to increase the pay scale to Rs.8,000-13,500/- to only the officers belongs to Senior Grade–II and who were appointed through the State Public Service Commission and whose salary were fixed by the Fitment Committee at Rs.6,500-10,500 (unrevised). Learned counsel for the State submitted that the petitioners were not appointed through the State 3 Public Service Commission, rather they were appointed by the RINPAS directly, and accordingly, the petitioners cannot be treated at par with the Senior Grade–II officers of the State Government, and are not entitled to the said enhancement.
8. It is however an admitted fact the Medical Officers of the RINPAS, are also not appointed through the State Public Service Commission, rather they are also appointed by RINPAS. Learned counsel for the Respondent RINPAS and learned counsel for the respondent State are not in a position to satisfy this Court as to why, when at one point of time, the post of Psychiatric Social Workers were being treated at par with the post of Medical Officers in RINPAS and they were in the same pay scale, why the benefit of enhancement of the pay scale was not given to the Psychiatric Social Workers, which was given to the Medical Officers only, and what prompted the respondent authorities not to treat the post of Psychiatric Social Workers at par with the Medical Officers at the later stage. There is practically no decision on this point by the respondent authorities. The decision on the point is absolutely necessary as to whether the post of Medical Officers in RINPAS, which at one point of time was at par with the post of Psychiatric Social Workers in RINPAS, carrying the same pay scale, can now be treated not at par, so as to deny the Psychiatric Social Workers the pay scale of Rs.8,000-13500/-. If the post of the Medical Officers, RINPAS are treated at par with the post of Psychiatric Social Workers of RINPAS, the Psychiatric Social Workers shall also be entitled to the said pay scale of Rs.8,000-13,500/- and there can be no reason as to why the Psychiatric Social Workers in RINPAS shall be denied the same pay scale, as has been allowed to the Medical Officers. In other words, the difference in the pay scales of these two posts can be there only in the event they are not treated at par.
9. In the facts of this case, since there is no decision on this point by the respondent authorities, the respondent authorities are directed to take the final decision on the point whether the post of Psychiatric Social Workers in RINPAS, which at one point of time was treated at par with the post of Medical Officers in RINPAS, the same status is to be continued. The respondent authorities shall take the final decision supported with cogent reasons, as stated above, positively within the period of eight weeks from the date of communication / production of this order, for which the respondent No.2, Director of RINPAS, shall place the matter before the Managing Committee of RINPAS, well within time, so that the decision in this regard may be taken within the period specified above.
10. This writ application stands disposed of with the directions as above. (H. C. Mishra, J) R.Kumar