Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Allahabad High Court

Syed Kazim Imam S/O Late Syed Anwarul ... vs State Of U.P.Through Its ... on 2 December, 2024

Author: Alok Mathur

Bench: Alok Mathur





HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
 
 


?Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:79788
 
Court No. - 6
 

 
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 186 of 2010
 

 
Petitioner :- Syed Kazim Imam S/O Late Syed Anwarul Hasan
 
Respondent :- State Of U.P.Through Its Prn.Secy.Public Works Department
 
Counsel for Petitioner :- Abdul Razzaque Khan,Aasif Razzaque Khan,Mayankar Singh
 
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
 

 
Hon'ble Alok Mathur,J.
 

1. Heard Sri Mayankar Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Standing Counsel for the respondents.

2. Grievance raised by the petitioner in the present writ petition is with regard to his claim that petitioner who is working on the post of Heavy Generator Operator seeks pay scale of Rs.5200-20,200 (Grade Pay - Rs.2400/-) w.e.f. 01.012006.

3. Contention of petitioner is that post of Generator Operator is divided into two categories, first category being of persons who operate generators below 50KV while the other category is of generator operators who operate generators above 50KVA capacity. The pay scale of both the set of generator operators are different and previously pay scale of generator operators who are involved in operating generators below 50KVA capacity was Rs.3050-4500, while next higher pay scale was of Rs.4000-6000. The petitioner claims himself to be in the pay scale of Rs.4000-6000/- and submits that he is entitled of pay scale of Rs.5200 - 20,200/- (Grade Pay Rs.2400/-).

4. The State Government has filed counter affidavit and therein has stated that in Public Works Department there is only one category of generator operators, who are getting same salary as that of petitioner.

5. In order to substantiate his arguments, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that similar posts are existing in Irrigation Department, where similarly situated persons are getting higher pay scale of Rs.4000-6000/-, to which the petitioner claims his entitlement. Learned counsel for the petitioner fairly submits that in the Public Works Department pay scales have not been amended suitably and because of this anomaly persons like petitioner are getting lower pay scale then their counter parts in the Irrigation Department.

6. Petitioner also claims parity with the judgment rendered in the case of Bhawani Prasad Sahu and Others Vs. State of U.P. and Others, Writ-A No. 167 of 2014 (decided on 14.12.2022), where this Court has considered the aforesaid controversy and has also observed that this anomaly has been noticed by the Chief Engineer, PWD and he has recommended the case for grant of higher pay scale vide his letter dated 31.07.2012.

7. It has been stated that despite letter having been sent to the State Government about ten years back, but till date the State Government has not taken any decision in this regard.

8. After arguing the matter up to some length, it is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that grievance of petitioner shall be substantially redressed in case State Government is directed to take decision in this regard and remove pay anomaly has noticed by the Chief Engineer, PWD by letter dated 31.07.2012 as well as by this Court in the judgment of Bhawani Prasad Sahu (supra).

9. Learned Standing Counsel does not object to the limited prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioner.

10. Accordingly, present writ petition is disposed of with direction to respondent no. 1 - State of U.P. Through its Principal Secretary, Public Works Department, Civil Secretariat, U.P., Lucknow to consider and resolve the controversy pertaining to anomaly in pay scale to which the Generator Operators are entitled, in the light of recommendation made by the Chief Engineer, PWD by his letter dated 31.07.2012.

11. Let necessary orders be passed by respondent no. 1, expeditiously, say within two months from the date of production of certified copy of this order, in accordance with law by means of reasoned and speaking order.

12. With aforesaid directions the writ petition stands disposed of.

Order Date :- 2.12.2024 A. Verma (Alok Mathur, J.)