Punjab-Haryana High Court
Suresh Ahlawat And Others vs State Of Haryana And Another on 12 September, 2012
Author: Augustine George Masih
Bench: Augustine George Masih
CWP No.22434 of 2010 [1]
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH.
C. W. P. No. 22434 of 2010
Date of Decision: 12 -9 - 2012
Suresh Ahlawat and others ....Petitioners
v.
State of Haryana and another ....Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH
***
Present: Mr.Sanjiv Gupta, Advocate
for the petitioners.
Ms.Shruti Jain, AAG, Haryana.
***
AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH, J. (ORAL)
By this common judgment, I propose to dispose of Civil Writ Petition Nos.22434 of 2010 and 1802 of 2011, as the issue involved in both the petitions is identical.
Petitioners have approached this Court praying for issuance of mandamus directing the respondents to grant them the pay scale of Rs.1640- 2900/- w.e.f. 1.1.1986, instead of pay scale of Rs.1400-2300/- in view of the communication dated 26.6.2009, Annexure P6. Claim has also been made on the basis of decisions dated 13.8.1999, Annexure P2 and 11.4.2008, Annexure P3.
CWP No.22434 of 2010 [2]
Petitioners were initially appointed as Junior Engineer in the Haryana State Minor Irrigation Tubewell Corporation (hereinafter to be referred to as, `H.S.M.I.T.C.'). They were sent on deputation with the Public Health Engineering Department, Haryana vide order dated 18.4.1990. They were governed by the terms of the deputation, according to which, they were to draw the same basic pay and pay scale which they were drawing in H.S.M.I.T.C., had they not been sent on deputation. They were absorbed in the Department of PWD Public Health Department on 11.2.1993. Pay of the petitioners was protected. Petitioners have approached this Court with a grievance that before 1.1.1986, the pay scale of Junior Engineers was Rs.700-1250/- and 20% Junior Engineers were entitled to pay scale of Rs.800/1400/-. Government of Haryana revised the pay scale of Junior Engineers to Rs.1400-2300/- and 50% Junior Engineers were held entitled to the pay scale of Rs.1640-2900/- w.e.f. 1.1.1986. Junior Engineers filed representations that there is an anomaly in the pay scale of Junior Engineers which were accepted and they were granted the pay scale of Rs.1640-2900/- and those Junior Engineers who had completed 15 years service were granted the pay scale of Rs.2000-3200/- vide notification dated 27.1.1992. Although the anomaly was removed but this pay scale was not granted w.e.f. 1.1.1986. Some of the Junior Engineers filed writ petition in this Court i.e. Civil Writ Petition No.16743 of 2001, titled as, `M.L.Wadhwa and others v. State of Haryana and others'. The said writ petition was allowed by this Court vide order dated 11.4.2008 granting the petitioners the revised pay scale on removal of anomaly on 1.1.1986 instead of 1.1.1992. Special Leave Petitions preferred by the State of Haryana i.e. Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) Nos.523-526 of 2009, `State of CWP No.22434 of 2010 [3] Haryana and others v. S.C.Miglani, Junior Engineer and others' were dismissed by the Supreme Court vide order dated 23.1.2009, Annexure P4. The benefit was granted to the Engineers of the PWD Public Health Department. Petitioners were not granted the said benefit on the ground that they were initially the employees of H.S.M.I.T.C. and were absorbed in Public Health Engineering Department w.e.f. 11.2.1993. Thus, prior to that they are not entitled to the revision in pay scales i.e. w.e.f. 1.1.1986. This action of the respondents has been assailed in the present petitions.
Counsel for the petitioners states that claim of the petitioners is covered by the ratio of judgment passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Haryana State Minor Irrigation Tubewells Corporation and others v. G.S.Uppal and others, 2008(3) S.C.T. 506 wherein this very issue has been considered and the relief as claimed by the petitioners had been granted by the Supreme Court, although H.S.M.I.T.C. had challenged the Division Bench judgment of this Court granting the higher pay scale to the similarly placed Junior Engineers of H.S.M.I.T.C. He accordingly contends that present writ petition deserves to be allowed.
On the other hand, counsel for the respondents states that the claim as has been made by the petitioners in the present writ petitions is not sustainable as they cannot be granted the pay scale prior to they being not in cadre of Junior Engineers that right they acquired on 11.2.1993 on their absorption. Prior thereto, they were the employees of H.S.M.I.T.C. and, therefore, they are not entitled to the said benefit. She states that the writ petitions deserve to be dismissed and do not call for any interference of this Court.
I have considered the submissions made by counsel for the CWP No.22434 of 2010 [4] parties and with their assistance have gone through the records of the case.
Petitioners, undisputedly, were employees in H.S.M.I.T.C. They were granted the same pay scale as has been granted to the Junior Engineers working in various departments of the Government. When the pay revision came into effect, they were given the same pay scale and similarly when the anomaly was removed, Junior Engineers working in H.S.M.I.T.C. were not granted the said pay scale which claim was raised by them by filing a writ petition. The said writ petition was allowed by the learned Single Judge of this Court which led to challenge of the said order by the H.S.M.I.T.C. before the Division Bench. The appeal preferred by the H.S.M.I.T.C. was dismissed, against which H.S.M.I.T.C. filed an appeal before the Supreme Court which came to be decided by the Supreme Court in Haryana State Minor Irrigation Tubewells Corporation and other's case (supra). In the said judgment in para 10, the Hon'ble Supreme Court had taken into consideration the submissions primarily made by counsel for the respondents that the revision and the removal of anomaly made by the Government was only applicable to the Engineers of PWD (three wings) and since the petitioners therein were not the employees of PWD, they were not entitled to the said benefit. After observing this, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in para 23 had proceeded to lay down the principles on the basis of which these petitioners would also be entitled to the pay scale i.e. revision and rectification of the pay scales and removal of the anomaly. Para 23 of the judgment reads as follows:-
"23. A careful examination shows that the issue was not really about grant of pay scales to Corporation Engineers on par with PWD Engineers. When the pay revision took place, the revised pay scales that were given to the Engineers of the State CWP No.22434 of 2010 [5] Government were also given to the engineers of the Corporation with effect from 1.1.1986 thereby maintaining the parity. What was not extended to the Corporation employees, which is the subject matter of the grievance, is the further revision by way of 'removal of anomaly in pay scales' given to AEE/AE/SDO/SDE of the State Government with effect from 1.5.1989 vide circular dated 2.6.1989 of the Finance Commissioner. The real question would be whether what is given by way of anomaly removal in the case of Engineers of State Government, should automatically be extended to the corresponding categories of engineers of the Corporation. When, after a pay revision, an anomaly is found in the pay scale given to a class of Government servants and such anomaly is rectified, it is not a new pay revision but a correction of the original pay revision, or an amendment to the pay scale that has already been granted. Therefore, where the pay revision extended to the government servants has already been extended to the employees of the Corporation also, it follows that any correction of anomaly in the revised pay scale given to the government servants should also be made in the case of those who were earlier given parity by extending the pay scale which is the subject matter of the correction. It should be borne in mind that the question whether Corporation engineers were on par with PWD Engineers and should be given parity in pay scales was already decided when the pay scale revision granted to Government (PWD) engineers was extended to the corporation Engineers also with effect from 1.1.1986. That question did not again arise when the anomaly in the pay revision was rectified with reference to the Government engineers. When the anomaly in the pay scale of Government engineers was rectified, the rectification should apply to Corporation engineers also to maintain the parity."
In the light of above judgment, the contention as raised by counsel for the respondents cannot be accepted.
CWP No.22434 of 2010 [6]
In view of the above, the present writ petition is allowed. Petitioners are held entitled to the grant of the benefit of pay scale of Rs.1640-2900/- w.e.f. 1.1.1986. The pay of the petitioners be accordingly fixed. However, arrears shall be restricted to 38 months prior to the date of filing of the writ petitions. Arrears be released to the petitioners within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order.
( AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH ) September 12, 2012. JUDGE RC