Punjab-Haryana High Court
W.C. Goyal vs State Of Haryana And Another on 29 May, 2012
Author: Augustine George Masih
Bench: Augustine George Masih
C.W.P. 905 of 2011 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Civil Writ Petition No.905 of 2011
Date of decision: May 29,2012
W.C. Goyal
................................petitioner
V.
State of Haryana and another
....................................respondents.
2. C.W. P. No.925 of 2011
Chander Singh Sharma
................................petitioner
V.
State of Haryana and another
...........................respondents
3. C.W.P. No.3813 of 2011
K.K. Gupta
.................................petitioner
V.
State of Haryana and another
...............................respondents.
4. C.W.P. No.7457 of 2011
Virender Singh Marya
. ........................petitioner
V.
State of Haryana and others
..........................respondents.
C.W.P. 905 of 2011 2
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH
Present: Mr. Devender Punia,Advocate for
Mr.S.S. Godara,Advocate for the petitioner in
C.W.Ps No.905, 925, and 7457 of 2011.
Mr. V.P.Goel, Advocate for thepetitoner
in C.W.P. No.3813 of 2011.
Mr. Harish Rathee, Sr.DAG, Haryana for the
respondents.
AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH,J.(ORAL)
By this order I propose to dispose of Civil Writ Petitions No.905, 925, 3813 and 7457 of 2011 as common questions of facts and law are involved in the present cases.
Petitioners have approached this Court impugning the order vide which their claim for the grant of fixation of their pay in the scale of Rs.13500-17250 has been rejected. Reliance has been placed upon the judgment passed by this Court in C.W.P. No.5520 of 2003 titled as S.P.Sood V. State of Haryana and others decided on 2.2.2009 ( Annexure P/4) wherein the similar claim as made by the present petitioners in the present petitions has been considered and granted.
Petitioners have approached this Court claiming the grant of equivalent pay scale as on 1.1.1996 which was earlier equated to the scale of Rs. 4100-5300 as on 1.1.1996 held by the petitioners and in the light of the Finance Department notification dated 20.4.2001 they are now claiming benefit of the pay scale of Rs.13500-17250 instead of Rs.12000-16500 granted to the C.W.P. 905 of 2011 3 petitioners by the respondents.
Counsel for the petitioners contend that the claim of the petitioners is in all force covered by the judgment of this Court in S.P.Sood's case (supra) and they accordingly pray for the same benefits.
Counsel for the respondents on the other hand submits that the petitioners are not entitled to the said claim. His contention is that the issue stands considered and decided against the petitioners by this Court in the judgment of Krishna Kumar V. State of Haryana 2000(2) S.C.T. 637 wherein while interpreting the Civil Service Revised Pay Rules,1998, this Court had rejected the similar claim made by the petitioners. He on these basis contends that the present writ petitions deserve to be dismissed.
I have considered the submissions made by the Counsel for the parties and with their assistance have gone through the record of the case.
Dealing with the judgment passed by this Court in Krishna Kumar's case (supra), reliance whereupon has been placed by the Counsel for the respondents, suffice it to say that this judgment was rendered prior to the issuance of the notification dated 20.4.2001, under which notification the petitioners are now claiming benefits. The Division Bench of this Court in Krishna Kumar's case (supra) was dealing with the rules which were prevalent prior to the issuance of the notification dated 20.4.2011. The said judgment would not apply to the case in hand.
I have gone through the judgment passed by this Court C.W.P. 905 of 2011 4 in S.P.Sood's case ( supra) which lead no manner of doubt that the claim as made by the petitioners through the present writ petitions is covered by the same on all force. The relevant portion of the judgment dealing with the grant of pay scale of Rs.13500-17250 reads as follows:
"Item No.68 of Annexure -A appended with this Notification clearly shows that the pay scale of Rs. 4100-5300 was revised to Rs. 13,500-17,250 w.e.f. 01.01.96. The case of the petitioner is that as per this clarification his pension had to be50% of the minimum to this revised scale viz. Rs. 6750/- but,as noticed above it had been fixed at Rs. 6000/-. In the written statement as well as in the additional affidavit dated 27.5.2008 again the only plea taken by the respondents is that in fact at that time XENs were in the pay scale of Rs.3000-4500 which had been revised to Rs. 10,000-13,900 and that even the higher scale was Rs. 3700-5000 which had been revised to Rs. 12,000- 16,500 and, therefore, the pension had been rightly fixed at Rs. 6000/- being 50% of the minimum of the revised scale viz. Rs.12,000-16,650. However,as noticed above OM No. 45/86/96-P&PW (A) (Point) dated 11.1.2001 (supra) had clarified that the pay scale of the post held by a pensioner was not important but what was important was the pay scale which had actually been enjoyed by him at the time of his retirement. Undisputedly the pay scale enjoyed by the petitioner at the time of his retirement was Rs. 4100-5300 which stood revised to Rs. 13,500-17,250/-. The respondents have also placed reliance on a decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No. 3174 of 2006, K.S.Krishnaswamy etc. v. Union of India and another which was decided on 23.11.2006 and a copy of which has been annexed with the aforementioned additional affidavit to contend that in that case the Hon'ble Supreme Court had not C.W.P. 905 of 2011 5 accepted the plea put forward by similarly situated employees. In reply learned counsel for the petitioner has pointed out that in that case petitioners had never been actually placed in the higher pay scale and that is why the Hon'ble Supreme Court had not granted them the benefit. In that very judgment the Hon'ble Supreme held that " it is common knowledge that the corresponding increase in any pay commission is of the scale of pay and not of the post" and subsequently upheld the OM No.45/86/96-P&PW (A) (Point) (supra) on 11.5.2001.
In the circumstances this writ petition is allowed. The order dated 14.11.2003 computing the pension of the petitioners at the rate of Rs.6000/- per month is set aside and the respondents are directed to fix the pension of the petitioners after taking into consideration the fact that at the time of his retirement he was drawing pay in the scale of Rs.4100-5300 which was revised to Rs. 13,500-17,250 and pay the arrears thereof with interest at the rate of 8% p.a. From the date of entitlement i.e. 1.3.2002 till the actual date of payment, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. In case the amount is not paid within three months aforesaid, even the interest component would earn interest at the rate of 8% p.a. till the date of payment."
In the light of the above, the present writ petitions are allowed in same terms as in S.P.Sood's case (supra). The petitioners shall be entitled to the arrears of pay and other retiral benefits as per the judgment passed by this Court in S.P.Sood's case (supra).
May 29, 2012 ( AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH ) sks JUDGE C.W.P. 905 of 2011 6