CHANDIGARH ADMINISTRATION Vs. SADHU SINGH AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present civil writ petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India has been filed with a prayer to issue the writ in the nature of certiorari of setting aside the order dated 04.08.2009 passed in Original Application No.241/CH/2007 (hereinafter referred to as the 'OA') by the learned Central Administrative Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench, Chandigarh (hereinafter referred to as the 'Tribunal') vide which the OA filed by respondent No.1 has been allowed, directing the fixation of his pay at 14700/- w.e.f. 01.01.1996.

(2.) The present petition has arisen out of OA No.241/CH/2007 filed by respondent No.1 Sadhu Singh, wherein he has pleaded that he joined the services of the petitioner as Sectional Officer on 20.04.1967 and was promoted as Sub Divisional Engineer on 14.04.1988 in the basic pay scale of 400-1100. He was given the senior scal e of 3700-5300 vide order dated 04.09.1997 w.e.f. 14.04.1995 on completion of 18 years of service as S.D.E. with change of designation as Deputy Executive Engineer. He was further promoted as Executive Engineer on 28.11.1996. In the year 1998, three FIRs were registered against 15 officials of the department including respondent No.1 and he was placed under suspension. He was allowed to retire while still under suspension w.e.f. 30.11.2003. In the Original Application, the respondent No.1 has claimed the issuance of appropriate order or direction, directing the petitioner to refund the illegal deduction made by them while re-affixing his pay in terms of the order of the Tribunal dated 13.02.2006 passed in OA No.405/CH/2004, for fixing of the pay of respondent No.1 in the pay scale of 14300-18110 at the stage of 14700/- with o ne increment due as on 01.01.1996 raising his pay at the level of 15 100/-, and to direct the petitioner to re-fix his pay and pension with all consequential benefits.

(3.) It was further pleaded that there was no order passed by the petitioner withholding the increments of respondent No.1 at the time of suspension or subsequently. So, the amount of increment which has been legally sanctioned by the competent authority cannot be withdrawn. It was further pleaded that prior to re-affixing of his revised pay, he was in the pay scale of 3700-5300 as on 14.04.1995 and was drawing a pay of 3900/- which is required to be fixed at the stage of 14700-18150 as his pay on 01.01.1996 was 4125/- as reflected in the se rvice book.