AB KHALIK Vs. DY MINISTER-IN-CHARGE LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) WITH a view to remove disparities and anomalies in the various pay structures of the ministerial as well as Field Staff employed by the Municipal Council, Srinagar, the post of Head Clerk was directed to be raised from the pay scale of Rs. 200 -430 to Rs. 280 -520. The pay scales of other categories of services were also rationalised in accordance with the Scheme vide order No. 250 of 1974 dated 30 -3 -1974 forming Annexure to the petition.

(2.) THE petitioner has averred that he was appointed as Head Clerk in the Municipality Srinagar, on the basis of merit and efficiency and in pursuance of the above rationalisation of grades he was given the benefit of the above mentioned grade (vide Order No. 21 of 1974 dated 14 -5 -1974). This order was issued by respondent No. 3, in conformity with Regulation No. 338 dated 1 -5 -1974 of Respondent No. 2. Respondent No. 4 preferred an appeal against the said order and the appeal was heard by respondent No. 1. In this appeal the petitioner did not figure as a respondent. He was not impleaded as a party No. 1 Summons were issued to him to appear before respondent No. 1 and to defend the order issued in his favour. However, on 1 -10 -1974 when the petitioner learnt through outside source that an appeal had been filed by respondent No. 4 against him, he made an application praying that he be permitted to engage a counsel and to argue the case so that he could defend the order issued in his favour. He also prayed for time to enable him to defend the case but respondent No. 1 with out giving any audience to the petitioner passed the impugned order dated 3 -10 -1974 by which he allowed the appeal and set aside the order dated 14 -5 -1974 of respondent No. 3.

(3.) THE petitioner contends that the impugned order is against the principles of natural justice as it has been passed without affording him an opportunity to be heard and without permitting him to defend the order passed in his favour. The petitioner was promoted as Head Clerk in the year 1966 and as a result of his appointment as Head Clerk he was given the grade of Rs. 280 -520: the revised grade of head clerk pursuant to the scheme of rationalisation of grades. The impugned order is not a speaking order and it does not show how and in what manner there has been departure from the observance of the rules and what is the relevant rule which is applicable. The order is vague as it suffers from infirmity and as such deserves to be quashed. The said order is also without jurisdiction. For these reasons it is prayed that by a writ of Certiorari the impugned order of respondent No. 1 by which the appeal of respondent No. 4 was allowed and the resolution of respondent No. 2 and the order of respondent No. 3 was set aside, be quashed.