CHAMELI DEVI Vs. STATE OF HARYANA AND ORS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner has approached this Court by way of instant writ petition filed under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India, seeking a writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing letter dated 30.09.2005 and 17.12.2008 and further prayer is issuance of direction to the respondents to grant the benefit of ACP scales to the husband of the petitioner at par with junior employee.

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the husband of the petitioner served for about 3 1/2 years in the office of respondent No. 3 and retired on 31.07.2003 and he has rendered about 36 years of service at the time of his retirement but the benefit of pay scale was not granted to him and Shish Ram, Sat Narain, Ram Parshad and Rishi Kumar all Octroi Clerk, who were appointed on Class III post after the death of petitioner's husband in the year 1969 were granted the benefit of 1st and 2nd ACP pay scales despite the fact that they were junior to the petitioner's husband, as he was appointed in the year 1968. Reference has been made to instructions dated 06.02.2007 and 13.04.2007 which was passed after the judgment of Hon'ble the Supreme Court in a case of Commissioner and Secy to Government of Haryana vs. Ram Sarup Gainda, 2007 3 RSJ 154 decided on 02.08.2006, . These instructions were with regard to stepping up of pay at par with junior employees in case of ACP matters.

(3.) Learned counsel for respondent No. 3 while referring to written statement has stated that the husband of the petitioner was appointed as Octroi Peon on 28.12.1965 and was promoted as Octroi Clerk on 09.09.1968. Learned counsel further submits that since Uday Ram was initially appointed in the Municipal Council, Rewari and he continued to serve the Municipal Council till he retired in July 2003, so he was not adjusted as Clerk and thus was not entitled for grant of ACP pay scale.