DHANNA SINGH Vs. FINANCIAL COMMISSIONER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner while posted as Assistant Design. Engineer, Sutlej Yamuna Link, Project, Punjab, Head Office Chandigarh, filed this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the issuance of a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to release and make payment of special pay w.e.f. 9.8.1977 to 31.7.1980.

(2.) Shorn of superfluous facts, the case of the petitioner is that respondent No. 3 who is junior to him, and posted as Assistant Design Engineer in field, has been given special pay whereas the same has been denied to him. The petitioner represented the matter to the authorities to remove the discrimination but the same has not been favourably considered. The case of the petitioner further is that the Chief Engineer, respondent No. 2, while submitting the Schedule of new expenditure for SYL Project, Head Office Staff for the year 1979-80 and 1980-81, copies Annexures P-5 and P5/A had specifically referred and asked for the sanction of special pay to the Assistant Design Engineer SYL Head Office and the Government had accorded the sanction as recommended in the expenditure scheduled by the Chief Engineer, vide orders dated 23.11.1978 and 17.1.1980, copies Annexures P-6 and P-6/A to the writ petition. Despite that, special pay was not released to the petitioner. Hence this petition.

(3.) The stand of the respondent-department on the other hand is that special pay is allowed only to the Assistant Design Engineers posted in the field and not to the one posted in the Head Office. Mrs. Charu Tuli, Assistant Advocate General, Punjab, appearing for respondents 1 and 2, referred to Government letter dated 27.4.1977, copy Annexure R-1 to show that Assistant Design. Engineers posted at the Head Office were not being paid special pay as per statement annexed to R-1.