MANOHAR LAL SHARMA AND ORS. Vs. HARYANA STATE INDUSTRIAL & INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LIMITED AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) FEELING aggrieved against the impugned order dated 27.8.2012 (Annexure P -7) passed by respondent No. 1, petitioners have approached this Court by way of instant writ petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India, seeking a writ in the nature of certiorari.

(2.) Petitioners also seek a writ in the nature of mandamus directing respondent No. 1 to implement its own decision dated 4.5.1993 which was reiterated vide decision dated 22.12.2011, granting the financial benefits to the petitioners, arising out of these decisions, along with interest.

(3.) LEARNED senior counsel for the petitioners submits that the respondent -corporation took a conscious decision way back on 4.5.1993 (Annexure P -2), whereby the board of directors considered the proposal and resolved that the revised pay -scales, as recommended by the Sub -Committee, were to be allowed to all the executives which would include the present petitioners as well. He further submits that when the above -said conscious decision taken by the Board of Directors of respondent No. 1 was not implemented, petitioners were left with no other option except to approach this Court by way of CWP No. 15298 of 1993 (Manohar Lal Sharma and others v. The State of Haryana and another), which was disposed of by this Court vide order dated 8.2.2011 (Annexure P -3). He would next contend that although respondent No. 1 ought to have granted, the service benefits claimed by the petitioners immediately in compliance of the order dated 8.2.2011 passed by this Court, yet it was not granted. The matter was again considered by the Board in its meeting held on 8.8.2011 and finally the matter was decided in favour of the petitioners vide Annexure P -4. The matter was again considered on 22.9.2011 under the Chairmanship of Financial Commissioner -Principal Secretary, Industries and Commerce Department, Haryana, and the issue was again resolved in favour of the petitioners vide Annexure P -5. The recommendations made by the Committee were again duly approved by the Board, while considering Item No. 42 in its meeting held on 22.12.2011 vide Annexure P -5.