Sh. Prakash Chander Srivastava and ors. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors. - Court Judgment

SooperKanoon Citationsooperkanoon.com/686144
SubjectService
CourtDelhi High Court
Decided OnFeb-19-2002
Case NumberC.W. 552/78
Judge Vijender Jain, J.
Reported in2002VIAD(Delhi)525; 97(2002)DLT340; 2002(62)DRJ405; 2003(1)SLJ198(Delhi)
AppellantSh. Prakash Chander Srivastava and ors.
RespondentUnion of India (Uoi) and ors.
Appellant Advocate V.K. Mishra, Adv
Respondent Advocate S.C. Dhanda, Adv.
Cases ReferredOriental Insurance Co. v. National Forum of Special Assistance and Ors.
Excerpt:
service law - categorisation--as senior assistance with consequential benefits of enhanced pay and status in the following manner.(a) those who are no longer in the category of assistants and have been promoted, they will get the difference in salary from 1.1.73 to the date of their promotion. (b) those who have retired as assistants before 31.12.94 shall be given from 1.1.73 till the date of retirement. (c) those who are continuing as assistants shall get the same from 1.1.73 till date. - - the respondents are further directed to draw a list of petitioners as well as persons who are similarly situated and give them notional promotions in accordance with their rules and regulations.vijender jain, j.1. this writ petition can be disposed of in view of the order passed by supreme court of india in the case of oriental insurance co. v. national forum of special assistants and ors. c.w. no. 1573/86, decided on 14.2.95. that was a case where the calcutta high court was considering case of special assistants in oriental fire and general insurance inter alias praying that they may be categorised as superintendents. the calcutta high court answered the question in affirmative. the oriental insurance co. ltd. filed appeal before the supreme court of india against the judgment of calcutta high court.2. in the case before hand, counsel for petitioners has contended that petitioners were denied their due category under the scheme by virtue of paragraph 5(2) (b)(ii)(a) as their categorisation ought to be as senior assistants with consequential benefits of enhanced pay and status from 1.1.73.3. it was further contended by sh. mishra counsel for the petitioners that the respondents have taken a curative action in november, 1976 when in recognition of the higher grade assistants' right to be categorised as superintendents along with 'superintendents and section heads' were promoted and redesignated as assistant administrative officers thus bringing the erstwhile higher grade assistants and section heads under the same category i.e. assistant administrative officer. in reply to the said paragraph the respondents have not specifically denied the same. it has been stated in the counter affidavit that taking into consideration the educational qualification of higher grade assistants they were promoted to the post of assistant administrative officer. however, it was denied that the higher grade assistants were redesignated as assistant administrative officer. be that as it may be, the judgment rendered by the calcutta high court in the case of national forum of special assistant and ors. v. union of india and ors. is fully applicable to the facts of the present case and the same was not interfered by supreme court of india in appeal as supreme court of india has agreed with the reasoning and conclusions reached by the calcutta high court. thereforee, following the judgment of supreme court of india in the case of oriental insurance co. v. national forum of special assistance and ors. (supra), the petitioners and other belonging to the same category shall be entitled to the difference in the salary, which they were drawing as assistants and which they would have drawn had they been categorised as senior assistants in the following manner:a) those who are no longer in the category of assistants and have been promoted, they will get the difference in salary from 1.1.73 to the date of their promotion.b) those who have retired as assistants before 31.12.94 shall be given from 1.1.73 till the date of retirement.c) those who are continuing as assistant shall get the same from 1.1.73 till date.4. the respondents are directed to work out the amount of arrears to be paid to be petitioners and other similarly situated persons within six months along with interest @ 6% per annum. the respondents are further directed to draw a list of petitioners as well as persons who are similarly situated and give them notional promotions in accordance with their rules and regulations. it is made clear that the notional promotion as given shall not entail any financial burden on the respondents. as the petition was filed in the year 1978 and the petitioners have succeeded in the writ petition after the same having been pending in this court for 24 years, the petitioners shall be entitled to cost of rs. 35,000/-.5. mr. dhanda counsel for the respondents submits that it may not be possible for the respondents to locate all the similarly situated persons thereforee a direction be given to the petitioner as it is representing the association to supply all the details of the similarly situated persons.6. mr. mishra counsel for the petitioners says that details shall be supplied within four weeks.7. let the details be supplied within four weeks, to the head office of the respondent with a copy to mr. dhanda counsel for the respondents for his information and necessary action.8. it is made clear that six months will start after submission of information by mr. mishra counsel for the petitioners to mr. dhanda counsel for the respondents.9. rule is made absolute.
Judgment:

Vijender Jain, J.

1. This writ petition can be disposed of in view of the order passed by Supreme Court of India in the case of Oriental Insurance Co. v. National Forum of Special Assistants and Ors. C.W. No. 1573/86, decided on 14.2.95. That was a case where the Calcutta High Court was considering case of Special Assistants in Oriental Fire and General Insurance inter alias praying that they may be categorised as Superintendents. The Calcutta High Court answered the question in affirmative. The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. filed appeal before the Supreme Court of India against the judgment of Calcutta High Court.

2. In the case before hand, counsel for petitioners has contended that petitioners were denied their due category under the Scheme by virtue of paragraph 5(2) (b)(ii)(A) as their categorisation ought to be as Senior Assistants with consequential benefits of enhanced pay and status from 1.1.73.

3. It was further contended by Sh. Mishra counsel for the petitioners that the respondents have taken a curative action in November, 1976 when in recognition of the Higher Grade Assistants' right to be categorised as Superintendents along with 'Superintendents and Section Heads' were promoted and redesignated as Assistant Administrative Officers thus bringing the erstwhile higher Grade Assistants and Section Heads under the same category i.e. Assistant Administrative Officer. In reply to the said paragraph the respondents have not specifically denied the same. It has been stated in the counter affidavit that taking into consideration the educational qualification of Higher Grade Assistants they were promoted to the post of Assistant Administrative Officer. However, it was denied that the higher Grade Assistants were redesignated as Assistant Administrative Officer. Be that as it may be, the judgment rendered by the Calcutta High Court in the case of National Forum of Special Assistant and Ors. v. Union of India and Ors. is fully applicable to the facts of the present case and the same was not interfered by Supreme Court of India in appeal as Supreme Court of India has agreed with the reasoning and conclusions reached by the Calcutta High Court. thereforee, following the judgment of Supreme Court of India in the case of Oriental Insurance Co. v. National Forum of Special Assistance and Ors. (Supra), the petitioners and other belonging to the same category shall be entitled to the difference in the salary, which they were drawing as Assistants and which they would have drawn had they been categorised as Senior Assistants in the following manner:

a) Those who are no longer in the category of Assistants and have been promoted, they will get the difference in salary from 1.1.73 to the date of their promotion.

b) Those who have retired as Assistants before 31.12.94 shall be given from 1.1.73 till the date of retirement.

c) Those who are continuing as Assistant shall get the same from 1.1.73 till date.

4. The respondents are directed to work out the amount of arrears to be paid to be petitioners and other similarly situated persons within six months along with interest @ 6% per annum. The respondents are further directed to draw a list of petitioners as well as persons who are similarly situated and give them notional promotions in accordance with their rules and regulations. It is made clear that the notional promotion as given shall not entail any financial burden on the respondents. As the petition was filed in the year 1978 and the petitioners have succeeded in the writ petition after the same having been pending in this Court for 24 years, the petitioners shall be entitled to cost of Rs. 35,000/-.

5. Mr. Dhanda counsel for the respondents submits that it may not be possible for the respondents to locate all the similarly situated persons thereforee a direction be given to the petitioner as it is representing the Association to supply all the details of the similarly situated persons.

6. Mr. Mishra counsel for the petitioners says that details shall be supplied within four weeks.

7. Let the details be supplied within four weeks, to the Head Office of the respondent with a copy to Mr. Dhanda counsel for the respondents for his information and necessary action.

8. It is made clear that six months will start after submission of information by Mr. Mishra counsel for the petitioners to Mr. Dhanda counsel for the respondents.

9. Rule is made absolute.