YASHPAL MALHOTRA Vs. GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioners were initially appointed as Typist on daily wages basis. They filed Writ Petition No. 253 of 1988 (Prakash Chand Jain and others v. Delhi Administrative and Others) for regularization of their services. Vide order dated 31. 10. 1988, the Hon'ble Supreme Court directed the respondents to frame a scheme regarding regularization of the services of the petitioners and similarly situated persons who had been in service for more than one year. In another Writ Petition (Jag Pal Singh and Others v delhi Administration and Others), the Hon'ble Supreme Court, vide order dated 28. 07. 1995, directed the respondents to create sufficient number of regular posts in Group C, for the petitioners. Pursuant to the above referred decisions, the respondents created 66 posts of Work Assistants, Typists and nts, in the pre-revised Pay Scale of Rs. 950-1500/ -. The post of Typist was classified as Group C and the petitioners were regularized on the post of typists in the revised pay Scale of Rs. 3050-4590/ -. For the purpose of granting benefit of Assured Career Progression Scheme (ACP), the petitioners were granted First Financial Up-gradation in the Pay Scale of rs. 3200-85-4900/ -. The case of the petitioners is that since the posts of typists and LDCs are comparable and have parity in all respects, they ought to have been granted First Financial Up-gradation in the pay scale of Rs. 4000-6000/-, which is the pay scale of the post of UDC. It would be pertinent to mention here that next promotional post in the cadre of LDC, being UDC, the petitioners would have been granted First Financial Up-gradation in the pay scale of Rs. 4000-6000/-, had they been regularized as LDCs.

(2.) SINCE the respondents did not concede the demand of the petitioners for granting First Financial Up-gradation to them in the Pay Scale of Rs. 4000-6000/-, they filed OA. No. 1083 of 2006 before Central Administrative tribunal (CAT ). The O. A. was dismissed vide order dated 4. 5. 2006.

(3.) THE case of the petitioners is that the Recruitment Rules for the post of Typists and LDCs are identical and therefore applying the principle of "equal pay for equal work", they are entitled to the same pay scale as are available to the LDCs. This is also the case of the petitioners that though they were appointed on different dates between 1981 and 1985, they have been regularized only w. e. f. 1. 6. 1989 whereas they are entitled to be regularized w. e. f. the date of their initial appointment.