MOHINDER SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner Mohinder Singh has filed the present writ petition under Articles 226 of the Constitution of Indian praying for benefit of revision of pay scale as Rs.1120/- Plus Rs.50/- as Special pay per month from 1.1.1978 to 15.7.1981. Further, he prays for onward annual increments upto 15.7.1981 i.e. the day the petitioner remained and served as ATO and also re-fixation of his pay by the Punjab Hospitality Department from where the petitioner superannuated. Interest on delayed payment as well as cost of litigation is also prayed for.

(2.) The facts leading to the present case are that the petitioner joined as Clerk in the Irrigation Department, Punjab on 28.5.1957. He became Assistant in the Irrigation Department, Punjab on 18.9.1961. After coming in the merit list in the open competition of the Punjab Public Service Commission (in short the PPSC) examination the petitioner joined as Assistant Treasury Officer on 24.11.1972 in the pay scale of 750/-, 1300/- and worked uptill 15.7.1981. Petitioner retired on 30.6.1983 from the Hospitality Department, Punjab as Joint Director.

(3.) The Punjab Government had appointed an Anomaly Committee which was to submit a report to the Government with regard to pay scale pertaining to Senior Auditors. On 1.8.1983 the Government of Punjab, on the report of Anomaly Committee revised the pay scale of Senior Auditors by re-designating them as Section Officer and placed them in the pay scale of Rs.800-=1400/- w.e.f. 1,1.1978. This benefit which was granted by the Government of Punjab to the Senior Auditors was of serious concern for the Assistant Treasury Officers who moved the High Court in CWP No. 4818 of 1987 titled as S.P. Mehta and others V/s State of Punjab and others. These were 23 Assistant Treasury Officers who had challenged the pay scale of Rs.800-1400 granted to the Senior Auditors on the ground that they are at par with them according to the similar nature of duties and that the audit report submitted by the Senior Auditors were examined by them and that the Senior Auditors were working under the Assistant Treasury Officers. Thus, according to Assistant Treasury Officers there was no justification in granting higher pay scale to the Senior Auditors.