Non-Reportable

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CIVIL APPEAL NO.4606 OF 2009 (Arising out of SLP© No. 23488/2004)

Government of Goa & Anr.                   …Appellants

Versus  J.M.R.Noronha     …Respondent

JUDGEMENT

R.M. Lodha, J.

Leave granted.

2. J.M.R.Noronha, respondent, filed a writ petition before the  

High  Court  of  Bombay  at  Goa  praying  therein  for  following  

reliefs:

“(a)       That  this  Hon’ble  Court  be  pleased  to  pass  an  appropriate Writ of Mandamus,  order or direction, calling for  the  records  proceedings  before  the  Respondent  no.  1/Committee  which  was   constituted  pursuant  to  the  Judgment of this Honourable Court dated 25.3.1998 in Writ  Petition No. 48/97 and after examining the legality, validity  and the reasonability of the decision of  the Committee be  pleased to quash and set aside the same.   

(b) that this Hon’ble Court be pleased to grant an  appropriate Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ,  order or  direction,  ordering and directing the Respondents  herein  to  forthwith  grant  to  the  petitioner,  the  benefit  of  revised A.I.C.T.E. pay scale of Rs. 3700-5700,  instead of  and in place of Rs. 2200-4000,  with effect from the date, as

granted to other similarly situated persons vide  Order dated  7.5.1994.”

3. The Division Bench allowed the writ petition in terms of  

prayer  clauses (a)  and (b)   on the  ground of  discrimination,  

namely,  that  the  Workshop  Superintendent  of  the  Agnel  

Polytechnic,  Verna  was  given  the  revised  pay  scale  of  Rs.  

3700-5700 while the petitioner was denied the same pay scale.  

This is what the Division Bench said:

“ 9. We have not thought it necessary to consider  the submission made by Shri Sonak on behalf of the  petitioner,  that  Shri  A.K.  Bidkar  should  not  have  associated  himself  with  the  Committee  or  its  deliberations,  in view of the fact that we find that the  grievance made out in the petition that the petitioner  has been discriminated against is justified.  Nothing is  placed on record to show as to why the Workshop  Superintendent of the Agnel Polytechnic, Verna,  was  found to be entitled to the revised pay scale, whereas  the petitioner was not………”

4. The learned counsel for the appellant submitted that  the  

revised  pay  scale  of  the  Workshop  Superintendent,  Agnel  

Polytechnic, Verna, was withdrawn way back in 1998 and pay  

scale of Rs. 2200-4000 was restored to that Officer.

5. Vide communication dated July 14,   1998,   the post  of  

Workshop Superintendent of the Agnel Polytechnic, Verna, was  

2

downgraded from the scale of Rs. 3700-5700 to the scale of  

Rs. 2200-4000/-. The said communication reads thus:

“No.17/18/94-EDN (COL)/4362       Government of Goa

                            Directorate of Technical  Education                               Porvorim –Goa.

                                                                       Dated :- 14/7/98 To,

The Suervisor, Agnel Polytechnic Verna.

Sir,

I  am directed  to  inform you  that  it  has been  decided  to  downgrade  the  post  of  Workshop  Superintendent of the Agnel Polytechnic, Verna, from  the scale of Rs. 3700-5700 to the scale of Rs. 2200- 4000/-.

In  view  of  the  above,  you  are  requested  to  issue  necessary  order  down  grading  the  post  of  workshop  Superintendent  of  your  institute  as  indicated above at your earliest, with a copy thereof  endorsed to this office for information.

                                                 Yours faithfully,     -Sd-                                                             (A.K. Bidkar)                                    Director of Technical Education                                                           Porvorim –Goa

Copy to: 1. The file of agnel Polytechnic, Verna.”

                                    6. We  are  informed  that  the  Workshop  Superintendent,  

Agnel  Polytechnic,  Verna,   did  not  challenge  the  aforesaid  

communication and the same  has attained finality.  

3

7. The High Court appears to have overlooked the fact that  

much before the matter  was decided by it,   the revised pay  

scale  of  Superintendent,  Agnel  Polytechnic,  Verna  stood  

withdrawn and he was put in the pay scale of Rs. 2200-4000/-,  

the same scale which the petitioner was getting.  Had this fact  

been  taken  into  consideration  by  the  High  Court,  ought  we  

know, what would have been its decision in the matter.   On this  

short  ground, matter needs to be  sent back  to the High Court.  

8. The  appeal  is,  accordingly,  allowed  and  the  judgment  

dated January 12, 2004  is set aside.   Writ petition is restored  

to the file of the High Court  for fresh consideration and disposal  

in accordance with law. As the matter is quite old, we request  

the High Court to expedite its hearing.

……………………J (Tarun Chatterjee)

…….……………..J         (R. M. Lodha)

New Delhi July 22, 2009.

4

5