Full Judgment
CWP No.11477 of 1991 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP No.11477 of 1991 Reserved on:
19. 09.2013. Date of Decision:
05. 10.2013 Shiv Kumar and others ....Petitioners. Versus State of Haryana and others .....Respondents AND CWP No.1391 of 1994 Mohinder Singh and others ....Petitioners. Versus State of Haryana and others .....Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PARAMJEET SINGH1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?. 2) To be referred to the Reporters or not?. 3) Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?. Present: Mr. S.S.Dalal, Advocate, for the petitioners (in CWP No.11477 of 1991). Mr. S.K.Sharma, Advocate, for the petitioners (in CWP No.1391 of 1994). Mr. K.C.Bhatia, Addl. A. G. Haryana. Mr. Manoj Sharma, Advocate, and Mr. C.B.Goel, Advocate, for respondent no.3. **** Kumar Parveen 2013.10.11 17:47 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court, Chandigarh CWP No.11477 of 1991 2 PARAMJEET SINGH, J.
Since both the writ petitions are similar in nature and involve identical questions of law and facts, they are being disposed of together. The petitioners are working in Haryana State Cooperative Supply & Marketing Federation Limited, Chandigarh (hereinafter referred to as “HAFED”.) as Steno-typists, Clerks and Assistants. They by means of these petitions have prayed for issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to allow the converted revised pay scale of Rs.1200-30-1560-EB-40-2040/- to clerks/steno- typists including the petitioner w.e.f 01.01.1986 as per the resolutions dated 03.06.1987 (Annexure P-1) and 25.07.1989 (Annexure P-5), in consonance with the recommendations of 4th Pay Commission as accepted and notified by the Government of Haryana vide notification dated 29.04.1987 and with consequential relief. At the time of filing the writ petitions, the petitioners were working on the post of Steno-Typists, Clerks and Assistants with the HAFED which is a cooperative society and State of Haryana exercises deep and pervasive control over the HAFED. The position of share capital of the HAFED as indicated from balance sheet as on 31.03.1990 is as under: Sr. Share Capital held by Amount No.1. Haryana Govt. Rs.15,96,06,500.00 2. Members Societies Rs. 1,73,72,000.00 3. Share suspense Rs. 7,00,851.34 Total Rs.17,76,79, 351.34 Kumar Parveen 2013.10.11 17:47 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court, Chandigarh CWP No.11477 of 1991 3 It is further alleged that the petitioners were the employees of The Punjab State Cooperative Supply & Marketing Federation Limited (MARKFED) before re-organization of the States of Punjab and Haryana and the HAFED was carved out of the MARKFED as per the rules. Before re-organization of the erstwhile State of Punjab, there was one institution known as MARKFED and after re-organization of the State of Punjab, the State of Haryana came into existence on 01.11.1966. In view of the re-organization of the State of Punjab, the MARKFED was also bifurcated into MARKFED and HAFED and thus the HAFED came into existence w.e.f 01.11.1966. Since the core controversy raised in these petitions relates to pay scale of the petitioners, it would be necessary, at the very outset, to reproduce at this stage Rule 16 of the Haryana State Supply and Marketing Cooperative Service (Common Cadre) Rules 1988 which deals with the grant of pay, allowances and other conditions to the employees of the HAFED:
16. PAY, ALLOWANCES AND OTHER CONDITIONS1 PAY Unless anything is otherwise contained in these rules, an employee appointed to any post in the service shall draw the pay of the post in the scale given in Annexure `A' as sanctioned/ revised from time to time with the approval of Registrar. 2) ALLOWANCES a) Dearness allowance and City Compensatory Allowance as sanctioned by Government from time to time shall be released by the Managing Director. b) The Board may prescribe Conveyance allowance to its employees subject to the approval of Registrar. Kumar Parveen 2013.10.11 17:47 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court, Chandigarh CWP No.11477 of 1991 4 c) House rent allowance shall be allowed at Government rates. d) Leave travel concession shall be allowed to the employees as per State Government instructions issued from time to time. e) Class IV employee and drivers may be supplied uniform and liveries as per norms fixed for such Government employees from time to time by the Government. f) other allowance(s) shall be allowed to the employees as per State Government instructions issued from time to time. NOTE :
1. Pay and allowances for the period of duty shall be paid to an employee by the society/Federation where the duty is performed. However, the subsistence allowance for the period of suspension and/ or other emoluments for that period shall be paid by the Federation.
2. For the period of leave other than Casual leave, the pay and allowances shall be paid by the Federation.
3. The society shall pay to the Federation the contribution towards leave salary, provident fund, gratuity, ex-gratia amount etc. at the rates intimated to them in respect of employee under Common Cadre working with them. The Federation shall maintain separate accounts for these contributions received from the societies and these funds shall be administered by Managing Director. 3) PAY FIXATION AND GRANT OF INCREMENTS a) If an employee is promoted from a post of lower category to a post of higher category, his initial pay in the higher post shall be fixed at a stage in the new pay scale above the stage which works out in the pay scale of the lower post from which he is promoted after adding the amount of the increment to the pay he is actually drawing at the time of promotion. b) Annual increment in the pay scale shall accrue to an employee normally on the first day of the month in which he completes one year service at a stage in the pay scale unless it has been specifically with-held by an order in writing. Provided that the annual increment of an employee who is on leave, except casual leave on the first day of the month, shall actually be drawn from the date of resuming duty on return from leave. c) The following periods shall count for completing the period of one year for the purpose of grant of annual increment:- Kumar Parveen 2013.10.11 17:47 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court, Chandigarh CWP No.11477 of 1991 5 i) Period of duty in the post. ii) All periods of leave with pay. iii) Period of officiating service in higher post in the service provided the employee would have worked in the lower post but for his promotion to the higher post. iv) Period of suspension if treated as duty by competent authority. v) All periods of leave on half pay. vi) Leave without pay up to 120 days taken on medical grounds. Note :
1. Increment at the efficiency stage shall be considered and allowed by the competent authority on the basis of annual confidential reports and in accordance with the instructions issued by Government from time to time in this behalf. 2 . The pay fixation, ACP / grant of increment or other financial benefits of the employees shall be given as per State Government instructions/rules/policies regarding revision of pay scales w.e.f.01.01.2006 or thereafter. 4) TRAVELLING ALLOWANCE Travelling allowance on tour, transfer and training shall be the same as applicable to the Government employees from time to time. 5) PROVIDENT FUND Except the employees on deputation from Government all employees of the Federation shall be entitled to the benefit of contributory provident fund as per the provisions of the Employees Provident Fund Act 1952. 6) BONUS All the employees shall be allowed bonus as per the provision of Bonus Act, as amended from time to time subject to the approval of Registrar. 7) GRATUITY All employees shall be eligible for payment of gratuity under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972. 8) MEDICAL REIMBURSEMENT1 Medical reimbursement shall be allowed to the employees as per instructions issued by Registrar from time to time.
2. Medical reimbursement for indoor treatment shall also be allowed to retired employees of the federation Kumar Parveen 2013.10.11 17:47 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court, Chandigarh CWP No.11477 of 1991 6 including their dependent family members with overall ceiling of Rs.2.00 Lacs. It would be appropriate to refer pay scales of the category of the petitioners before reorganization an after reorganization which reads as under: It would be appropriate to refer to the pay scales of the category of the petitioners before and after coming into existence of the HAFED which is as under: Before Re-organization (Pay Scales of Clerks and Steno-typists Sr.No.Working under State Govt. MARKFED1 Rs.60-175/- Rs.80-200/- After Re-organization (Pay Scales of Clerks and Steno-typists Sr.No.Working under State Govt. HAFED1 Rs.110-250 (w.e.f 01.01.1968) Rs.140-300/- 2. Rs.400-660 (w.e.f 1.4.1979) Rs.480-760/- It is further averred that as per the Notification dated 29.04.1987 (Annexure P-3), all the posts in Group “C”. and “B”. carrying pay scales of Rs.480-760/- were placed in the pay scale of Rs.1200- 2040/- w.e.f 01.01.1986. Vide Annexure P-1, the Board of Directors of HAFED in its meeting held on 03.06.1987 accepted the recommendations of 4th Pay Commission, as adopted by the Haryana Government, for application to the employees of the HAFED. The proposed pay scale of the employees as per the statement circulated at the time of meeting of adoption of recommendations of 4 th Pay Commission on the pattern of Haryana Government, was approved. A statement showing existing and proposed scales of pay of HAFED Kumar Parveen 2013.10.11 17:47 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court, Chandigarh CWP No.11477 of 1991 7 employees reads as under: Sr. Designation Existing Scales Revised Scales Remarks No.of post Hr. Govt. HAFED Hr. Govt. HAFED --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1 2 3 4.
5. 6.
7. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- xx xx xx xx xx xx xx Category No.3 1. Clerk 400-600(TS) 480-15-540/- 950-1500 ) 20-700/30-760 ) 480-760(SG) 500-15-560/- ) 20-700/30-850 ) (SG) 2. Jr. Artist - 480-15-540/- 1200-2040 ) 20-700/30-760 ) 3. PBX - -do- plus 950-1500 ) 1200-30- Operator Rs.25/- S.P ) 1560-EB- 4. Steno- 400-660 -do- plus Rs.25/- 950-1500 ) 40-2040 typist plus Rs.50/- S.P. ) S.P. ) 5. Accou- - 480-15-540- 1200-2040 ) -ntant - 20-700/30-760 ) 'C' Grade ) 6. Field - -do- -do- ) Inspector (Jr.) ) 7. Driver 420-700(TS) 420-10-490 -do- ) plus Rs.100-SP. 525-15-600/- ) for drivers of 20-700 plus Rs.150/- ) Ministers and S.P. at Headquarters ) Rs.25/- for bus and L.O. Delhi and ) drivers. Rs.100/- in field. ) 525-900 (SG) xx xx xx xx xx xx It is further averred that thereafter, pay scale of the petitioners was reduced by the Pay Revision Committee for Public Undertakings in its meeting held on 16.10.1987 vide Annexure P-2 and a statement showing the revised pay scales of employees of HAFED reads as under: Kumar Parveen 2013.10.11 17:47 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court, Chandigarh CWP No.11477 of 1991 8 Sr. Name of Existing Revised Remakrs --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1 2 3 4 5 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Category xx xx xx xx No.1 to 3 Category No.4 Restorer/Gestoner 400-10-490/540-15-600/ ) Operator 20-660 ) Asstt. Baker Bakeries -do- ) Lab. Attendant(Matric) -do- ) Tracer 400-10-490/540-15-600/ ) 20-660 ) Clerk 480-15-540/20-700/ ) 30-760 (TS) ) 950-20-1150-EB- 500-15-560/20-700/ ) 25-1500. 30-850(SG) ) Junior Artist -do- ) PBX Operator -do- Plus Rs.25/- SP ) Steno-typist -do- Plus Rs.50/- SP ) Cinema Operator 420-10-490/525-15-600/ ) (CPF Rohtak) 20-700 Category No.5 xx xx xx The Government of Haryana on the recommendations of the 4th Pay Commission had revised the pay scales of their employees w.e.f 1.1.1986 vide notification dated 29.04.1987. The revised pay scales of posts carrying the unrevised scales were divided into groups 'D', 'C', 'B' and 'A' according to which the posts carrying the unrevised scales as specified in Column 3 of the First Schedule, Part 'A' attached to the aforesaid Gazette Notification was revised as under: Sr. No.Posts Present Scale Revised Scale 1 to 3 XXX XXX XXX Group 'C' and 'B' Kumar Parveen 2013.10.11 17:47 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court, Chandigarh CWP No.11477 of 1991 9 Sr. No.Posts Present Scale Revised Scale 4 All posts carrying Rs.400-600 Rs.950-20-1150- present scale Rs.400-600 (TS) EB-25-1500 specified in Col.
3. Rs.480-760/- -do- Rs.420-700 5 Rs.420-700 (TS) Rs.525-900 (SG) Rs.450-700 Rs.1200-30- Rs.480-760 1560-EB-40- Rs.480-760 (TS) 2040/- Rs.525-900 (SG) It is further averred that Board of Directors of HAFED again in its meeting held on 25.07.1989 (Annexure P-5) approved the proposed pay scale of Rs.1200-2040/- to Clerks and Steno-typists working in HAFED on the ground that Clerks and Steno-typists working in HAFED were getting higher pay scale since the inception of HAFED. It is further averred that Accountant “C”. Grade, Field Inspectors working in HAFED who were earlier in pay scale of Rs.480-760/- like the petitioners were granted pay scale of Rs.1200-2040/- in HAFED also. The drivers, who were in the lower pay scale of Rs.420-700/- were also granted pay scale of Rs.1200-2040/- w.e.f 01.01.986. Hence, this civil writ petition. Upon notice, the respondents put in appearance. Respondents no.1 and 2 in their reply took the stand as under to corresponding paras of writ petitions:
“24. That in reply to Para 24 of the petition, it is submitted that a committee was constituted by the Govt. of Haryana vide order No.16/120/87-APV-PE and IC (FD) dated 6.8.87 and 16/120/87-APE and IC (FD) dated Kumar Parveen 2013.10.11 17:47 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court, Chandigarh CWP No.11477 of 1991 10 27.11.87 for examining the recommendation of the 4th Pay Commission for revision of Pay Scale of employees of the Federation (Hafed). The said committee of the public enterprises Bureau considered the matter in their meeting held on 15.5.91 and rejected the proposal of revision of pay scales of Clerks/Steno typists. This was, obviously done with a view to keep parity with the pay scales as available to other Organizations and public sector undertakings in the State of Haryana. The representative of respondent No.3 was also present in the said meeting. It is, however, incorrect that respondent no.2 was required to accord only formal approval to the recommendations of the Board of directors of the Federation. The Registrar, Cooperative Societies, Haryana is required to examine the proposals as may be received from the Federation in accordance with certain norms and guidelines as may be issued by Govt. from time to time and he cannot, as such, be considered be just a rubber stamp for approving of the proposals of the Federation, without application of mind judiciously.
25. That in reply to para 25 of the petition, it is submitted that as already explained in para 24 above, the standing committee of the public enterprises Bureau as constituted by the Govt. did not approve the proposal for revision of pay scales of clerks/Steno typists of the employees of the Federation (Hafed). The said committee had obviously kept in view the pay scales available to other similar categories of employees working in the offices of the State Govt. and also other Organizations/undertakings functioning in the State of Haryana. The recommendations of the Standing Committee which were approved by the Govt. were Kumar Parveen 2013.10.11 17:47 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court, Chandigarh CWP No.11477 of 1991 11 certainly justified with a view to keep parity and to avoid unnecessary resentment amongst the employees of other departments/Organizations of the Govt. The Board of Directors of the Federation was, in any case, not the final and competent authority under the Bylaws and Common Cadre Rules, 1988 for allowing the revised pay scales to the employees of the Federation. The action of the answering respondent is perfectly legal, justified and, thus, sustainable under law.”
. Other facts of the writ petition have been admitted. Respondent no.3 filed its separate reply. Respondent no.3 took the stand that since inception of HAFED after bifurcation from MARKFED, HAFED has its own pay scales for its employees and therefore the averments made with reference to the pay scales in MARKFED are hardly relevant for adjudication of the present petition. It is alleged that the Registrar, Cooperative Societies, Haryana referred the matter to a committee constituted by Haryana State Government in the Finance Department vide its orders dated 29th July, 1987 conveyed vide endorsement dated 6th August, 1987 (copy at Annexure R/1) and No.16/120/87-A-IV-PE & IC (FD) dated 26.8.1987 (copy at Annexure R/II) conveyed to the Managing Directors of the State Undertakings/Corporations/ Companies/Boards and Cooperative Institutions along with their Administrative Secretaries requiring that the proposed pay scales category-wise as approved by the Board of Directors of the State Undertakings/Corporations/Cooperative Institutions etc. be submitted to Public Enterprises and Investment Cell Kumar Parveen 2013.10.11 17:47 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court, Chandigarh CWP No.11477 of 1991 12 (Finance Department) through Administrative Department for approval. The said Committee approved the pay scales of Clerks/Steno-typists of HAFED as Rs.950-1500/- keeping them at par with the pay scales of Government employees clubbing the pay scales of clerk/steno-typists as under: Rs.400-600 ) Rs.480-760/- (TS) ) Rs.950-20-1150-EB-25-1500 Rs.500-850/- (SG) ) It is admitted that vide Annexure P-1, the Board of Directors of HAFED approved the revised pay scale, but the Standing Committee constituted by the State Government did not approve the proposal of HAFED and disapproval was conveyed to the respondent-HAFED. The contents of para no.22 of the writ petition have been admitted in corresponding para of the reply which reads as under:
“22. That the contents of para 22 of the writ petition are not denied being the matter of record. However, the approval of the Registrar, Cooperative Societies Haryana (respondent no.2) is required as per the Haryana State Supply and Marketing Cooperative Service (Common Cadre) Rules, 1988.”
. In substance, the stand of respondent no.3 is that the HAFED approved everything, but the Government of Haryana and the Committee appointed by the Government had followed the scales which were recommended by the Sub Committee. A relevant extract of the reply is being reproduced as under: “The Haryana Government in Finance Department vide notification No.15/48//89/ARO-11/HBPE dated Kumar Parveen 2013.10.11 17:47 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court, Chandigarh CWP No.11477 of 1991 13 20.11.1989 constituted a Standing Committee to examine and to decide such proposals concerning Boards, Corporations, Companies and Cooperative Institutions (copy at Annexure R-III). As required vide Haryana Government Notification dated 20.11.1989, the matter was forwarded to the said committee. The minutes of the meeting of the Standing Committee were conveyed to the answering respondent by the Finance Department Haryana vide its endorsement No.1/1/12PE9D) dated 24.5.1991 saying that the proposal of Hafed regarding pay scales for clerks was not approved in view of the report of the Sub Committee. The respondent no.2 also conveyed the approval of the Haryana Government of the revision of pay scales with respect to certain other posts vide its endorsement No.1/23/87-Mkt. (I) dated 26.8.91 for implementation. In the said letter, the post of Clerks had not been shown, obviously for the reason that the proposal of respondent no.3 was rejected by the Standing Committee on Public Enterprises.”
. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. Learned counsel for the petitioners has vehemently contended that steno-typists, clerks and assistants of the HAFED were having higher pay scale from the very beginning as compared to the employees of the State Government, being a commercial profitable organization. The learned counsel has further contended that once Board of Directors of HAFED which is an autonomous body passed resolutions and approved the pay scale of Rs.1200-2040/- to Clerks and Steno-typists, Kumar Parveen 2013.10.11 17:47 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court, Chandigarh CWP No.11477 of 1991 14 then the decision of the Committee is not binding upon the Board. The learned counsel has further contended that pay scales of the petitioners cannot be compared and equated with other employees of the State Government because there is difference between the duties, responsibilities and reliability of the petitioners. The petitioners have to work under different conditions and constraints because of commercial activities as compared to those with the employees of the State Government and other Corporations. As such, granting of different pay scales to different categories at the instance of the Committee is violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution and cannot be justified and sustained. The learned counsel has further contended that vide Notification (Annexure P-3), all the posts in Group “C”. and “B”. carrying pay scale of Rs.480-760/- were placed in the pay scale of Rs.1200-2040/- and the HAFED being a strong financial organization is bound to pay the same scale to the petitioners as has been revised by the Government. To substantiate his contentions, the learned counsel has relied upon Haryana State Biologists Association v. The State of Haryana 1994 (4) Recent Services Judgments 444, Haryana State Minor Irrigation Tubewells Corporation and others v. G.S.Uppal and others (2008) 7 Supreme Court Cases 375, decision rendered in CWP No.11764 of 1989 titled Ashok Kumar and others v. State of Haryana and others, on 08.05.1990 and decision rendered in CWP No.4879 of 1987 titled Swatantar Kumar and others v. The State of Punjab, on 26.09.2008. Kumar Parveen 2013.10.11 17:47 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court, Chandigarh CWP No.11477 of 1991 15 On the other hand, learned State counsel and learned counsel for respondent no.3 have vehemently opposed the contentions of learned counsel for the petitioners and contended that it is for the Government to revise the pay scales, it is the administrative decision and the High Court cannot interfere, as such, the petitioners are not entitled for the revised pay scales of Rs.1200-30-1560-EB-40-2040/-. In support of his contentions, the learned counsel have placed reliance upon SBI v. M.R.Ganesh Babu (2002) 4 SCC556 State of Haryana v. Haryana Civil Secretariat Personal Staff Assn. (2002) 6 SCC72and Union of India v. S.B.Vohra (2004) 2 SCC150 I have given my conscious thought to the contentions raised by learned counsel for the parties. In SBI v. M.R. Ganesh Babu (supra), the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that equal pay must depend upon the nature of work done. It cannot be judged by mere volume of work; there may be qualitative difference as regards reliability and responsibility. Functions may be same but the responsibilities make a difference. Once the difference is a matter of degree, there is an element of value judgment by those who are charged with the administration in fixing the scales of pay and other conditions of service. So long as such value judgment is made bona fide, reasonably on an intelligible criterion which has a rational nexus with the object of differentiation, such differentiation will not amount to discrimination. The judgment of administrative authorities concerning the responsibilities which attach to the post and the degree of reliability Kumar Parveen 2013.10.11 17:47 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court, Chandigarh CWP No.11477 of 1991 16 expected of an incumbent, would be a value judgment of the authorities concerned which, if arrived at bona fide, reasonably and rationally, is not open to interference by the court. In Union of India v. S.B.Vohra (supra), the Hon'ble Supreme Court dealing with the fixation of pay scales of officers of the High Court of Delhi (Assistant Registrars) held that the fixation of pay scales is within the exclusive domain of the Chief Justice, subject to approval of President/Governor of the State and the matter should either be examined by an expert body or in its absence by the Chief Justice and the Central or State Government should attend to the suggestions of the Chief Justice with reasonable promptitude so as to satisfy the test of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. Further, it was observed that financial implications vis-a-vis effect of grant of a particular scale of pay may not always be a sufficient reason and differences should be mutually discussed and tried to be solved. In State of Haryana vs. Haryana Civil Secretariat Personal Staff Assn. (supra), the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that the High Court was in error in allowing the parity in pay scale to State Civil Secretariat PAs with Central Secretariat PAs merely because the designation was same, without comparing the nature of their duties and responsibilities and qualifications for recruitment and without considering the relevant rules, regulations and executive instructions issued by the employer governing the cadre concerned. There is no dispute with regard to the principle laid down in Kumar Parveen 2013.10.11 17:47 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court, Chandigarh CWP No.11477 of 1991 17 the abovesaid decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court that fixation of pay and determination of parity in duties is the function of the executive and the scope of judicial review of administrative decision in this regard is very limited. However, it is also equally well settled that the courts should interfere with the administrative decisions pertaining to pay fixation and pay parity when they find such a decision to be unreasonable, unjust and prejudicial to a section of employees and taken in ignorance of material and relevant facts. In this regard, reference can be made to K.T.Veerappa v. State of Karnataka (2006) 9 SCC406 In the backdrop of the factual situation of the case as well as the principles of law laid down in Haryana Civil Secretariat Personal Staff Assn. (supra), it is well settled that State can make reasonable classification if it is based on intelligible differentia which has a reasonable nexus with the object sought to be achieved. It is admitted position in the present case that the petitioners are the employees of HAFED and their pay, allowances and other conditions are governed by Rule 16 of the Haryana State Supply and Marketing Cooperative Service (Common Cadre), Rules 1988 framed by HAFED. According to these Rules, each post in HAFED will carry a timescale of pay as indicated in Annexure A to the Rules. Further, the pay scales are subject to revision by the Board, which will, however, generally follow the pattern adopted by the Government of Haryana from time to time. The approval is to be granted by the Registrar. Before re-organization of the erstwhile State of Punjab, Kumar Parveen 2013.10.11 17:47 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court, Chandigarh CWP No.11477 of 1991 18 employees of the HAFED were the employees of MARKFED and since inception of HAFED after bifurcation from MARKFED, pay scales of the category of the petitioners were more than the employees of the Government of Haryana as is clear from the table reproduced in the foregoing paragraphs. The Board of Directors has recommended the revised pay scales of the clerks, steno-typists and assistants of the HAFED commensurate to the revised pay scales of the government employees, but the State Government has not concurred with and approved the decision of the Board of Directors in view of the report of the Committee. By virtue of Rule 19 of the Haryana State Supply and Marketing Cooperative Service (Common Cadre), Rules, 1988, the Board of Directors in its discretion has powers to appoint, remove or suspend such managers, secretaries, officers, clerks, agents and servants of permanent, temporary or special services, as it may from time to time think fit and to determine their powers and duties and fix their salaries or emoluments etc. The power to fix the salaries or emoluments of the employees of the HAFED specifically rests with the Board of Directors of the HAFED. In accordance with the service Rules, the HAFED had favourably considered the claim of the petitioners by recommending the same scale for them, as were being given to their counterparts in the service of the government departments, vide Annexures P-1 and P-5. The proposal of the Board of Directors of the HAFED for revision of pay scales to its employees came up before the Standing Kumar Parveen 2013.10.11 17:47 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court, Chandigarh CWP No.11477 of 1991 19 Committee in its meeting held on 15.05.1991 wherein the Standing Committee rejected the proposal for revision of pay scale of clerks, steno-typists and assistants as recommended by the Board of Directors of HAFED, but the pay scales of other employees were approved. The Standing Committee approved the pay scales in a selective manner. The pay scales of other category were approved whereas the revision of pay scales of the petitioners was postponed and it was decided that the matter would be examined separately by the Finance Department and ultimately the pay scale of the petitioners was reduced on the ground to keep parity with the pay scales as available to other employees of the similar status working in other organizations and undertakings of the Government of Haryana. No reasons have been recorded, nor the duties, functions and responsibilities as well as the financial status of the HAFED was taken into consideration. As such, the petitioners cannot be treated at par with their counterparts in other State organizations having similar categories of employees. At least, they are entitled to the same pay scale as the State Government is giving to its employees. In such circumstances, the petitioners are entitled to revision of pay scales on par with their counterparts working in the State of Haryana. Admittedly, the classification laid down for recruitment of the employees of the HAFED are identical to those prescribed in the departments of State Government, rather the facts reveal that from the very beginning i.e. when erstwhile State of Punjab was in existence and the petitioners being the employees of MARKFED were having higher Kumar Parveen 2013.10.11 17:47 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court, Chandigarh CWP No.11477 of 1991 20 pay scale than their counterparts in the State Government departments'. Even since inception of HAFED, the petitioners were getting higher pay scales than their counterparts in the Haryana Government. But all of sudden, their pay scale was reduced and made even lessor than the employees of the State Government as given in Annexure P-3. In this manner, the petitioners were obviously placed at disadvantageous position. The decision of the State Government rejecting the proposal of the Board of the Directors relying upon the report of the Sub Committee suffers from the vice of invidious discrimination and cannot be sustained because the very same decision of the Board of Directors with regard to all other employees of HAFED has since been approved by the Government. Reply filed by the State Government does not disclose any evidence on record to establish that the working condition, responsibility and nature of duties etc. of the petitioners are different from their counterparts working in the same category in the State of Haryana. A careful examination of the material and the evidence of the case shows that issue was not really about grant of revised pay scales to the petitioners w.e.f 01.01.1986 on par with their counterparts working in the same category in the State Government. The same revised pay scales were given by the State Government to its employees. The same were approved by the HAFED w.e.f 1.1.1986, but the same were not extended to the petitioners in view of report of the Committee allegedly for removing anomaly in the pay scales. It is admitted position that Kumar Parveen 2013.10.11 17:47 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court, Chandigarh CWP No.11477 of 1991 21 scales of pay as were applicable to the steno-typists, clerks and assistants working in the MARKFED were higher than the State Government. Even after reorganization, when HAFED came into being, the pay scales of the petitioners were higher than their counterparts working in other departments of the State Government. Before the pay scales were revised w.e.f 01.01.1968, clerks and steno-typists working in the State Government were in the pay scale of Rs.110-250/-, however, the persons working in same category in HAFED were in the pay scale of Rs.140-300/-. Again when the pay scales were revised w.e.f. 1.4.1979, clerk and steno-typist working in the State Government were granted the pay scale of Rs.400-660/-, however, the persons working in the same category in HAFED were granted the pay scale of Rs.480- 760/-. The sequence of events clearly indicates that pay scales of the category of the petitioners were higher than the corresponding category of the employees of the State Government. Now, the pay scales of the category of the petitioners have been reduced and they have not been treated even equally with those in the Government departments. In view of above, the instant writ petitions are allowed. Respondents are directed to grant pay scale of Rs.1200-30-1560-EB-40- 2040/- to the petitioners from the date, recommendations of the 4th Pay Commission were implemented for other employees of the State and HAFED i.e. with effect from 01.01.1986. Consequently, the respondent shall revise their salary and pay them the consequential benefits including arrears of salary within a period of six months from receipt of Kumar Parveen 2013.10.11 17:47 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court, Chandigarh CWP No.11477 of 1991 22 certified copy of this order. The retiral benefits including pension of the persons who have retired by now shall also be accordingly refixed and arrears released. No order as to costs. (Paramjeet Singh) Judge October 05, 2013 parveen kumar Kumar Parveen 2013.10.11 17:47 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court, Chandigarh