Supreme Court of India
U.P. STATE CEMENT CORPORATION LTD. AND ORS.versusB.K. TEWARI
- Citation
- 1997 INSC 812
- Decided
- 11 December 1997
- Disposal
- Appeal(s) allowed
- Bench
- D P WADHWA
Holding
An employee is entitled only to the pay scale expressly mentioned in the appointment letter he accepted and cannot claim a higher revised grade not specified therein.
Summary
The respondent applied for the post of Manager (Personnel & IR) in U.P. State Cement Corporation Ltd. but was initially offered the lower post of Deputy Manager, which he declined. After a revision of pay scales, the corporation issued an amended appointment letter designating him as Manager with a pay scale of Rs.1,500‑2,000, which the respondent accepted and joined. He later claimed entitlement to the higher revised grade of Rs.1,800‑2,250, and the Allahabad High Court allowed his claim. On appeal, the Supreme Court held that the appointment letter expressly specified the pay scale and conditions, and that the respondent could not read into it a higher scale not mentioned, even though the revision occurred before the offer. Consequently, the Court set aside the High Court judgment and dismissed the writ petition, affirming that the employee is bound by the terms of the accepted offer.
Issues considered
- Whether an employee who accepts an appointment letter specifying a particular pay scale can later claim entitlement to a higher pay scale resulting from a subsequent revision of pay scales.
Subjects
appointment letterpay scale revisionacceptance of offercontract of serviceemployee remunerationjudicial review
Judgment
A U.P. STATE CEMENT CORPORATION LTD. AND ORS.
v.
B.K. TEWARI
DECEMBER 11, 1997
B [D.P. WADHWA AND A.P. MISRA, JJ.)
Se1Vice Law :
Appoi11tme11t-<Jffer of-Tenns and conditions-Acceptance-lmplica-
C tions of-Employee declined offer for the post of Deputy Manager (P & IR)
since he had applied for the post of Manager ( P & IR)-Subsequently, there
was revision of pay scales:-f'osts of Dy Manager/Sr. Dy Manager/Manager in
pay scale of Rs. 1,400-1,800 re-designated as Manager (Works) in pay scale
of Rs. 1,500-2,000 whereas the posts of Manager/Company Secreta1y in pay
D scale of Rs. 1,500-2,000 re-designated as Senior Manager (Works)!Company
Secretary in pay scale of Rs. 1,800-2,250-Amended offer given to employee
designating him as Manager (P & IR) in pay scale of Rs. 1,500-
2,00()--£mployee accepted amended offel'-Thereafter, he raised a claim for
the revised grade of Rs. 1,800-2,25o-Held : Employee entitled to pay scale
as per offer of appointment which was accepted by hi~T71erefore, the
E employee could not claim better tenns-Hence, his claim for higher pay scale
rejected.
In pursuance to an advertisement issued by the appellant, the
respondent applied for the post of Manager (P & IR). The respondent was,
however, olTerred the post of Deputy Manager (P & IR). The respondent
F declined this post statini~ that he had applied for the post of Manager (P &
IR) and could not accept the post of Deputy Manager (P & IR). In the
meanwhile, there was a revision of pay scale and the posts of Dy Manager/Sr.
Dy. Manager/Manager in the pay scale of Rs. 1,400- 1,800 were re-designated
as Manager (Works) in the pay scale of Rs. 1,500-2,000 whereas the posts of
G Manager/Company Secn!tary in the pay scale of Rs. 1,500-2,000 were re-desig·
nated as Joint Sr. Manager (Works)/Company Secretary in the pay scale of
Rs. 1,800- 2,250. The amended offer of appointment was given to the respon·
dent designating him as Manager (P & IR). The appellant rejected the
respondent's representation for placement in the revised grade of Rs. 1,800·
2,250. High Court allowed the writ petition filed by the respondent challeng·
H ing the aforesaid rejection of his representation. Hence this appeal.
436
U.P.STATECEMENICORPN.LTD. v. B.K. TIWARI[D.P. WADHWA,J.] 437
Allowing the appeal, the Court A
HELD : 1. The letter offering the respondent the appointment of
Manager is specific. This letter was written after the revision of pay scales.
Not only that, the letter mentioning the designation of the respondent had
also, in clear terms, mentioned the pay scale of the Manager which was
being offered to him. This letter was accepted by the respondent with the B
terms and conditions contained therein. The respondent cannot read in the
letter more than what it says. Offer of appointment was given to the respon-
dent after revision of the pay scales and the appellant could not possibly
have given the old pay scales. [439-G-H; 440-A]
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No, 8664 of C
1997
From the Judgment and Order dated 4.4.97 of the Allahabad High
Court in C.M. W.P. No. 14129 of 1988.
Vijay Hansaria, Sunil K. Jain, M/s. Jain Hansaria & Co. for the D
Appellants.
Ashok K. Sharma, Indra Makwana for the Respondent.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by
E
D.P. WADHWA, J. Special Leave granted.
This appeal is directed against the judgment dated April 4, 1977 of
Division Bench of the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad allowing the
writ petition of the respondent whereby he was held entitled to the benefits
of the revised pay scale and designation of the post he was holding. F
In pursuance to an advertisement issued by the appellant the respon-
dent applied for the post of Manager (Personnel) Grade E4 by letter dated
May 1, 1986. He was however, offered the post of Deputy Manager (P &
IR) on terms and conditions as mentioned in letter dated October 23, 1986
of the appellant. The respondent declined this post stating that he had G
applied for the post of Manager (P & IR) and could not accept the post
of Deputy Manager (P & IR). This was by letter dated November 5, 1986.
In the meanwhile, there was revision of pay scales of the officers and staff
of the appellant, which was communicated to the appellant by letter dated
November .12; 1986 of the State Government. The relevant part of the
revision of pay scales is as under : H
438 SUPREME COURT REPORTS (1997) SUPP. 6 S.C.R.
A SI. Designation Pity Scales Designation Pay Scales
No. (In Rs.) (In Rs.)
3. Dy. Manager/ 1400-1800 Manager 1500-60-
Sr. Dy. Mana- (Works) 1800-100-
,. ger I Manager 2000
B 4. Manager/ 1500-2000 Joint Sr. Manager 1800-100-
company (Works)/Company 2000-125-
Secretary Secretary 2-2250
Ii
Then comes the appointment letter issued to the respondent. This
C letter is in brief and we merely produce the same as under :
"Gram :'UP CEMENT CHURK
The Uttar Pradesh State Cement Corporation Ltd.
(AUP Govt. Undertaking)
D Registered Post
(Seal)
UNIT: CHURK CEMENT FACTORY
REGD. OFFICE
E CHURK 231206 '
Dept: Ref. No. PS/HQ/R-10/1038 Dated: December 4, 1986
To,
Shri B.K. Tiwari,
F
120, Vindhweshni Nagar,
Orderly Bazar,
Varanasi Cantt.,
221002.
G Sub.: Offer of Appointment for the
Post of Manager (Perso1111el & JR)
Dear Sir,
Please refer to your letter No. NIL of dated 5th November, 1986
H on the above subject. After due consideration it has been decided
U.P.SfJ\TECEMENTCORPN.LTD. v. B.K. TIWARI [D.P. WADHWA,J.) 439
to amend your appointment offer to the following extent. A
1. Your designation is hereby amended as Manager {Personnel
& IR).
2. Your basic pay will be Rs. 1.500 per month in the scale of
pay of Rs. 1500-60-1800-100-2000. B
3. Your joining time is hereby extended upto 15th February,
1987. No further extension will be granted.
All other terms and conditions of our appointment offer No.
PS/HQ/R-10/872 dated 23.10.1986 remain unaltered.
c
Yours faithfully
Sd/- (N.M. Majumdar)
Chairman and Managing Director" D
The respondent accepted the offer given to him by the aforesaid
appointment letter and accepted the post of the Manager (P & IR). He
joined this post on February 28, 1987 and on April 24, 1987 represented
to the appellant that he was entitled to placement in the revised grade of
Rs. 1800-2250 which according to him was applicable to Manager (P & IR) E
Head Quarters. This representation was rejected and this led to filing of
the writ petition by the r.espondent in the High Court which was allowed
as aforesaid.
We do not think there is much controversy involved in the present F
case. The respondent said that at the time when he had applied for the
post of Manager (E-4) it was in the pay scale of Rs. 1500-2000 and what
was offered to him was the post of Deputy Manager in the pay scale of
Rs. 1400-1800. Thus, according to the respondent, when he was offered the
post of Manager, the pay scale had already been revised to Rs. 1800-2550
to which, he said, he was entitled to. We don't think this contention of the G
respondent can be accepted. Letter offering him the appointment of
Manager is specific. This letter, as noted. above, was written. after the·
revision of pay scales. Not only that, the letter mentioning the designation
of the respondent had also, in clear terms, mentioned the pay scale of the
Manager which was being offered to him. H
440 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1997) SUPP. 6 S.C.R.
A This letter was accepted by the respondent with the terms and
conditions contained therein. The respondent cannot read in the letter
more than what it says .. Offer of appointment was given to the respondent
after revision of the pay scales and the appellant could not possibly have
given the old pay scales. We, therefore, do not accept the view taken by
B the High Court.
We, accordingly, set aside the impugned judgment of the High Court
and dismiss the writ petition filed by the respondent. The appeal is allowed
with no order as to costs.
v.s.s. Appeal allowed. ·
Search Indian case law
Ask in plain English, not just keywords. 25,000 AI words free, no card.
Try "appointment letter"Sign in to search