Punjab-Haryana High Court
Subhash Chander Chugh vs M.D.Dakshin Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam ... on 31 May, 2011
Author: Ranjit Singh
Bench: Ranjit Singh
CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.13283 OF 2010 :{ 1 }:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
DATE OF DECISION: MAY 31 ,2011
Subhash Chander Chugh
.....Petitioner
VERSUS
M.D.Dakshin Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Limited, Hisar and another
....Respondents
CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RANJIT SINGH
1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgement?
2. To be referred to the Reporters or not?
3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?
PRESENT: None for the petitioner.
Mr. R. S. Kundu, Advocate,
for the respondents.
****
RANJIT SINGH, J.
This order will dispose of Civil Writ Petition Nos.13283 of 2010 and 2350 of 2011. The facts are being taken from C.W.P. No.13283 of 2010.
The petitioner prays for issuance of mandamus to the respondents to count work-charge period of his service for the purpose of grant of additional increment on completion of 8 and 18 years of service and for grant of higher standard pay scale on completion of 10/20 years of service.
CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.13283 OF 2010 :{ 2 }:
The petitioner was appointed on work charge basis as Lab Attendant on 29.7.1972. His services were regulaised as Meter Mechanic on 1.1.1989. Reference is made to the Haryana Government instructions dated 1.7.1992 and 1.1.1994, regulating the grant of additional increments on completion of 8/18 years of service and for higher standard pay scale for 10/20 years of service. Though the petitioner has been granted these benefits but the service rendered by him on work charge basis has not been counted. The petitioner has retired on 31.8.2009 but his pension has been fixed without calculating the service rendered on work charge basis.
In the reply filed, it is stated that the petitioner is not entitled to second additional increment, which is admissible on completion of 18 years of regular service. As per the reply, the petitioner is also not entitled to Ist and 2nd higher standard scales by counting the work charge service towards the pensionary benefits.
In fact, the issue of counting the work charge service is no more res-integra and has been settled by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Dakshin Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam & Others Vs. Bachan Singh (Civil Appeal No.4903 of 2009), decided on 30.7.2009. On the basis of this judgment, this Court in bunch of writ petitions, including Civil Writ Petition No. 17805 of 2009 (Bhunda Ram Vs. UHBVNL and others) decided on 25.2.2010, has issued following directions:-
"(9) For the reasons afore-stated, the writ petition is allowed and the respondents are directed to allow the petitioner to exercise his option in terms of the Circular CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.13283 OF 2010 :{ 3 }:
dated 6.8.1993 (Annexure P-1) and/or subsequent circulars dated 9.8.1994 (Annexure P2) within a period of three months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order and thereafter, the respondent-Corporation shall inform the petitioner the amount of employer's contribution towards EPF to be deposited by him alongwith interest within a period of one month as stipulated under the Instructions and upon receipt thereof, the petitioner shall deposit the same within a period of two months thereafter. After the receipt of amount to be deposited by the petitioner, the respondents are directed to count the work-charged service rendered by the petitioner w.e.f. 7.11.1968 to 16.1.1976 towards his pensionary benefits which shall accordingly be revised/released at the earliest."
The controversy regarding grant of benefit of higher standard pay scale is also covered by the Division Bench judgement of this Court dated 16.1.2006 passed in CWP No.17954 of 2004. This judgement was challenged before the Hon'ble Supreme Court and the Special Leave Petition was dismissed on 1.9.2010. Hon'ble Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No.5740-41 of 1997 titled State of Haryana and others Vs. Ravinder Kumar and others, has granted benefit of 8 and 18 years of service as also the higher standard pay scale on completion of 10 and 20 years of service.
Recently, this Court had considered all these issues in Civil Writ Petition No.22779 of 2010, Ram Chander and another CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.13283 OF 2010 :{ 4 }:
Vs. H.P.G.C.L. and others, decided on 21.12.2010, and has relied upon all these judgements to issue direction for counting the work charge period rendered by the petitioner towards pensionary and retiral benefits.
The counsel has also placed before me the instructions issued by the Finance Department, Government of Haryana, on 15.3.2002, regarding counting of adhoc and work-charge service towards the benefit of additional increment on completion of 8 and 18 years of service and higher standard pay scale after 10 and 20 years of service. As per these instructions, which are issued on the basis of law laid down in number of cases, adhoc service is not to be counted towards regular service for the purpose of calculating of prescribed length of service for grant of additional increment on completion of 8 and 18 years of service under the Scheme introduced by the Government vide letter dated 7.8.1992. The service rendered on the work charge basis of regular service, which count for the purpose of increment in the cadre as well as qualifying service for pension, the same is to be taken into account for purpose of calculation of prescribed length of service under the scheme of additional increment on completion of service of 8 and 18 years, implemented vide Government instructions dated 7.8.1992 and for grant of higher standard scale on completion of 10 and 20 years of service under the scheme of higher standard scale introduced by the Government vide letter dated 8.2.1994. This is in compliance of the orders of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Ravinder Kumar (supra).
CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.13283 OF 2010 :{ 5 }:
In view of the issue being fairly settled, these writ petitions are allowed. The respondents are directed to count the work charge period of service rendered by the petitioners towards pensionary/retiral benefits. The petitioners are held entitled to the benefit of additional increment on completion of 8/18 years of service as also higher standard pay scale on completion of 10/20 years of service in terms of the above judgements.
May 31,2011 (RANJIT SINGH ) khurmi JUDGE