STATE OF PUNJAB Vs. R S SHARMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The respondents who are legal advisers in the Punjab Roadways prayed and were granted the relief of parity of pay with the Legal Assistants in the Department of Law and Legislation w.e.f. 1.1.1978 vide the judgment impugned in this appeal.

(2.) It has been contended that as the different qualifications were prescribed at the time of initial appointment of the respondents and all the Legal Assistants in the Department of Law and Legislation, the learned Single Judge could not have granted the relief prayed for. The submission is without any basis inasmuch as the qualification prescribed for the respondents and the Legal Assistants in the Department of Law and Legislation was LL.B. though it was mentioned that the persons to be eligible for appointment as Legal Assistants in the Department of Law and Legislation should have obtained a degree of LL.B. in first class which was not the case so far as the writ petitioners were concerned. It is not disputed that for both the posts, minimum requisite educational qualification was a degree in Law and for those having first class degree, the period for experience was prescribed as two years whereas for those who had not acquired degree in first class, the period of experience was for three years. It is next contended that as the parity of the salary was not granted after the year 1983, the writ petitioners could not have been granted the relief as was done by the learned Single Judge. However, the fact of the matter is the pay scales of the writ petitioners and of the Legal Assistants in the Department of Law and Legislation were treated to be equal till 1983. There appears to be a conscious decision on the part of the respondents to grant parity in the scales of pay which was withdrawn afterwards without assigning any reasonable ground.

(3.) This Court in Haryana State Biologists Association v. The State of Haryana and another, 1994 2 SLR 389, held that once a parity in the pay scales of the employees in two categories is granted, the same cannot be withdrawn and the parity disturbed. It was further held that once the State is shown to have made a conscious decision of providing parity in the pay scales of employees failing in two different cadres, they cannot be permitted to deprive one class or category by disturbing the parity. Any order passed or action taken which results in deprivation of the parity in the pay scales would be discriminatory being violative of the provisions of Article 16 of Constitution requiring interference.