Raj Kumar and Others Vs. State of Haryana and Another - Court Judgment

SooperKanoon Citationsooperkanoon.com/1134650
CourtPunjab and Haryana High Court
Decided OnMar-20-2014
AppellantRaj Kumar and Others
RespondentState of Haryana and Another
Excerpt:
civil writ petition no.19207 of 2010 -1- in the high court of punjab and haryana at chandigarh civil writ petition no.19207 of 2010 date of decision: march18 2014 raj kumar & others .....petitioners versus state of haryana and another ....respondents coram:- hon'ble mr.justice augustine george masih1 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: mr.d.s.rawat, advocate for the petitioner. mr.sunil nehra, sr.dag, haryana, for the state. ***** augustine george masih, j. (oral) petitioners have approached this court praying for issuance of a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to grant the pay-scale of `1640-2900/- with effect from 01.01.1986 to the petitioners and to fix their pay in accordance with the judgment dated 11.04.2008 (annexure p-2) passed by the division bench of this court in cwp no.16743 of 2001, titled as 'm.l.wadhwa & others versus state of haryana', with all consequential benefits. it is the contention of the counsel for the petitioner that vide notification dated 29.04.1987, haryana government revised the pay-scale of harish kumar 2014.03.21 10:36 i attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document civil writ petition no.19207 of 2010 -2- all its employees with effect from 01.01.1986. in a number of departments like pwd (b & r) feeder cadre posts of junior engineers (i.e.road inspector) were given the revised pay-scale of `1400-2300/- which was an anomaly thus created where the feeder cadre and promotional post was carrying the same pay-scale. the government of haryana considered it as an anomaly and granted the pay-scale of `1640-2900/- to all the junior engineers working in all the government departments with effect from 01.01.1992 vide letter dated 27.01.992 (anneuxre p-1).this action of the respondents was challenged by the junior engineers of the department of public health by filing cwp no.16743 of 2001, titled as 'm.l.wadhwa & others versus state of haryana', claiming therein the grant of pay-scale of `1640-2900/- with effect from 01.01.1986. the said writ petition was allowed by this court vide order dated 11.04.2008 (anneuxre p-2).junior engineers of irrigation department, thereafter, approached this court by filing cwp no.13331 of 2008, titled as 'shingara singh dhull & others versus state of haryana & others', claiming therein revised pay-scale with effect from 01.01.1986 instead of 01.01.1992. the said writ petition was allowed by this court vide order dated 12.02.2009 observing therein that the distinction sought to be drawn by the state on the ground that the benefit of revised pay-scale was only granted to the junior engineers of public works department and not to the junior engineers of other departments and the contention that this anomaly was only referrable to the said department was not accepted. it was observed that once the anomaly was removed, the same would be applicable to junior engineers of all the departments and merely because the junior engineers belonged to harish kumar 2014.03.21 10:36 i attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document civil writ petition no.19207 of 2010 -3- different departments, the claim cannot be denied to them. on the same principles and basis, counsel contends that the petitioners in the present writ petition who belong to the department of development and panchayats and, therefore, cannot be discriminated against and the benefit deserve to be conferred on them on the same analogy. on the other hand, counsel for the respondents submits that the anomaly on the basis of which the higher pay-scale was granted to the junior engineers with effect from 01.01.1992 vide letter dated 27.01.1992 (anneuxre p-1) was to be given effect to from the said date qua all the departments, however, in the light of the judgments passed by this court in m.l.wadhwa's case (supra) which related to the department of public health which was in fact a department where the anomaly did exist the benefit was granted to the junior engineers of the said department with effect from 01.01.1986 but the said principle cannot be made applicable to the petitioners where in the department of development and panchayats, there was no such feeder cadre, therefore, there can be no anomaly and the post on which the petitioners were appointed i.e.junior engineers is a direct cadre post. he places reliance upon the judgment of this court in cwp no.16737 of 2013, titled as 'subhash chander singla & others versus state of haryana & others.to contend that the situation in which the petitioners are claiming the said benefit would not be an anomaly vis-a-vis the petitioners of the said judgment, therefore, in m.l.wadhwa's case (supra) would not be applicable to the claim of the petitioners.he further contends that the judgment in shingara singh dhull's case (supra) since has only relied upon the judgment in m.l.wadhawa's case (supra) would not be of any benefit to harish kumar 2014.03.21 10:36 i attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document civil writ petition no.19207 of 2010 -4- the petitioners.prayer has thus been made for dismissal of the writ petition. i have considered the submissions made by the counsel for the parties and with their assistance have gone through the records of the case. the position which emerges from the rival contentions of the counsel for the parties indicates that there was no anomaly in the pay-scale being granted to junior engineers of the department of development and panchayats as there is no feeder cadre for the post of junior engineers.however, there can be no distinction when an anomaly in one of the department is found to be existing by the government and having accepted the said fact took a policy decision to grant the pay-scale of rs.1640-2900/- with effect from 01.01.1992. when similarly placed employees holding the same posts have been granted the benefit in the light of the judgment in m.l.wadhawa's case (supra) passed by this court, the same benefit cannot be declined to the petitioners.the contention of the counsel for the respondents that this anomaly would not be relatable to the department of development and panchayats, cannot be accepted as there cannot be different parameters with regard to the pay revision and the benefit to be granted thereon. the observations made by the learned single judge in shingara singh dhull's case (supra) further clarifies this position where one of the pleas taken by the respondents was that the department of irrigation in that writ petition was different from the one in m.l.wadhawa's case (supra).the observations read as follows:- “the only ground urged by counsel for the respondents is that the petitioners herein belong to the irrigation department, while the petitioners in cwp harish kumar 2014.03.21 10:36 i attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document civil writ petition no.19207 of 2010 -5- no.15532 of 1994 were the employees of the public works department, and the petitioners in m.l.wadhwa's case were of the public health department. in my opinion, the distinction being sought to be drawn is fallacious. once the anomaly was removed for all the categories of junior engineers.it would not be open to the respondents to now make an attempt to differentiate between the junior engineers of different departments. in the circumstances, these writ petitions are allowed and the respondents are directed to grant the revised pay scale of rs.1640-2900 and 2000-3200 w.e.f 1.1.1986 instead of 1.1.1992. however, their arrears would be restricted to a period of 38 months prior to the filing of these writ petitions. no costs.”. in view of the above, contention as raised by the counsel for the respondents cannot be accepted. prayer made in the present writ petition is allowed. petitioners are held entitled to the pay-scale of rs.1640-2900/- with effect from 01.01.1986 alongwith other consequential benefits. however, arrears shall be restricted to a period of 38 months prior to the date of filing of the writ petition. march 18, 2014 ( augustine george masih ) harish judge harish kumar 2014.03.21 10:36 i attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
Judgment:

CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.19207 of 2010 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.19207 of 2010 DATE OF DECISION: MARCH18 2014 Raj Kumar & others .....Petitioners VERSUS State of Haryana and another ....Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH1 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: Mr.D.S.Rawat, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr.Sunil Nehra, Sr.DAG, Haryana, for the State.

***** AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH, J.

(ORAL) Petitioners have approached this Court praying for issuance of a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to grant the pay-scale of `1640-2900/- with effect from 01.01.1986 to the petitioners and to fix their pay in accordance with the judgment dated 11.04.2008 (Annexure P-2) passed by the Division Bench of this Court in CWP No.16743 of 2001, titled as 'M.L.Wadhwa & others versus State of Haryana', with all consequential benefits.

It is the contention of the counsel for the petitioner that vide notification dated 29.04.1987, Haryana Government revised the pay-scale of Harish Kumar 2014.03.21 10:36 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.19207 of 2010 -2- all its employees with effect from 01.01.1986.

In a number of departments like PWD (B & R) feeder cadre posts of Junior Engineers (i.e.Road Inspector) were given the revised pay-scale of `1400-2300/- which was an anomaly thus created where the feeder cadre and promotional post was carrying the same pay-scale.

The Government of Haryana considered it as an anomaly and granted the pay-scale of `1640-2900/- to all the Junior Engineers working in all the Government Departments with effect from 01.01.1992 vide letter dated 27.01.992 (Anneuxre P-1).This action of the respondents was challenged by the Junior Engineers of the Department of Public Health by filing CWP No.16743 of 2001, titled as 'M.L.Wadhwa & others versus State of Haryana', claiming therein the grant of pay-scale of `1640-2900/- with effect from 01.01.1986.

The said writ petition was allowed by this Court vide order dated 11.04.2008 (Anneuxre P-2).Junior Engineers of Irrigation Department, thereafter, approached this Court by filing CWP No.13331 of 2008, titled as 'Shingara Singh Dhull & others versus State of Haryana & others', claiming therein revised pay-scale with effect from 01.01.1986 instead of 01.01.1992.

The said writ petition was allowed by this Court vide order dated 12.02.2009 observing therein that the distinction sought to be drawn by the State on the ground that the benefit of revised pay-scale was only granted to the Junior Engineers of Public Works Department and not to the Junior Engineers of other departments and the contention that this anomaly was only referrable to the said department was not accepted.

It was observed that once the anomaly was removed, the same would be applicable to Junior Engineers of all the departments and merely because the Junior Engineers belonged to Harish Kumar 2014.03.21 10:36 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.19207 of 2010 -3- different departments, the claim cannot be denied to them.

On the same principles and basis, counsel contends that the petitioners in the present writ petition who belong to the Department of Development and Panchayats and, therefore, cannot be discriminated against and the benefit deserve to be conferred on them on the same analogy.

On the other hand, counsel for the respondents submits that the anomaly on the basis of which the higher pay-scale was granted to the Junior Engineers with effect from 01.01.1992 vide letter dated 27.01.1992 (Anneuxre P-1) was to be given effect to from the said date qua all the departments, however, in the light of the judgments passed by this Court in M.L.Wadhwa's case (supra) which related to the Department of Public Health which was in fact a department where the anomaly did exist the benefit was granted to the Junior Engineers of the said department with effect from 01.01.1986 but the said principle cannot be made applicable to the petitioners where in the department of Development and Panchayats, there was no such feeder cadre, therefore, there can be no anomaly and the post on which the petitioners were appointed i.e.Junior Engineers is a direct cadre post.

He places reliance upon the judgment of this Court in CWP No.16737 of 2013, titled as 'Subhash Chander Singla & others versus State of Haryana & otheRs.to contend that the situation in which the petitioners are claiming the said benefit would not be an anomaly vis-a-vis the petitioners of the said judgment, therefore, in M.L.Wadhwa's case (supra) would not be applicable to the claim of the petitioneRs.He further contends that the judgment in Shingara Singh Dhull's case (supra) since has only relied upon the judgment in M.L.Wadhawa's case (supra) would not be of any benefit to Harish Kumar 2014.03.21 10:36 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.19207 of 2010 -4- the petitioneRs.Prayer has thus been made for dismissal of the writ petition.

I have considered the submissions made by the counsel for the parties and with their assistance have gone through the records of the case.

The position which emerges from the rival contentions of the counsel for the parties indicates that there was no anomaly in the pay-scale being granted to Junior Engineers of the Department of Development and Panchayats as there is no feeder cadre for the post of Junior EngineeRs.however, there can be no distinction when an anomaly in one of the department is found to be existing by the Government and having accepted the said fact took a policy decision to grant the pay-scale of Rs.1640-2900/- with effect from 01.01.1992.

When similarly placed employees holding the same posts have been granted the benefit in the light of the judgment in M.L.Wadhawa's case (supra) passed by this Court, the same benefit cannot be declined to the petitioneRs.The contention of the counsel for the respondents that this anomaly would not be relatable to the Department of Development and Panchayats, cannot be accepted as there cannot be different parameters with regard to the pay revision and the benefit to be granted thereon.

The observations made by the learned Single Judge in Shingara Singh Dhull's case (supra) further clarifies this position where one of the pleas taken by the respondents was that the Department of Irrigation in that writ petition was different from the one in M.L.Wadhawa's case (supra).The observations read as follows:- “The only ground urged by counsel for the respondents is that the petitioners herein belong to the Irrigation Department, while the petitioners in CWP Harish Kumar 2014.03.21 10:36 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.19207 of 2010 -5- No.15532 of 1994 were the employees of the Public Works Department, and the petitioners in M.L.Wadhwa's case were of the Public Health Department.

In my opinion, the distinction being sought to be drawn is fallacious.

Once the anomaly was removed for all the categories of Junior EngineeRs.it would not be open to the respondents to now make an attempt to differentiate between the Junior Engineers of different departments.

In the circumstances, these writ petitions are allowed and the respondents are directed to grant the revised pay scale of Rs.1640-2900 and 2000-3200 w.e.f 1.1.1986 instead of 1.1.1992.

However, their arrears would be restricted to a period of 38 months prior to the filing of these writ petitions.

No costs.”

.

In view of the above, contention as raised by the counsel for the respondents cannot be accepted.

Prayer made in the present writ petition is allowed.

Petitioners are held entitled to the pay-scale of Rs.1640-2900/- with effect from 01.01.1986 alongwith other consequential benefits.

However, arrears shall be restricted to a period of 38 months prior to the date of filing of the writ petition.

March 18, 2014 ( AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH ) Harish JUDGE Harish Kumar 2014.03.21 10:36 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document