BHUPINDER SINGH THAKUR Vs. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with order dated 7.8.2014 (Annexure P-11), passed by respondent No.3 i.e. Chief Executive Officer, Himachal Pradesh, Khadi and Village Industries Board, Shimla, H.P., whereby prayer having been made on behalf of the petitioners to revise their pay scales at par with Senior Assistants with effect from their appointments in the Board in terms of judgment dated 27.11.2012 passed by the Coordinate Bench of this Court in CWP(T) No. 11365 of 2008, came to be rejected, petitioners have approached this Court, praying therein for following main reliefs:-

(2.) Precisely, facts of the case as emerge from the pleadings adduced on record are that some Assistant Development Officers working in the respondent Board approached this court earlier by way of CWP(T) No. 11365 of 2008, seeking therein direction to the respondents to remove the anomaly existing in the pay scales of Assistant Development Officers w.e.f. 1983. Coordinate Bench of this Court vide judgment dated 27.11.2012 allowed the petition and directed the respondents to revise the pay scales of the petitioners in that case at par with the Senior Assistants with effect from 1983 and to release the arrears to them along with interest @9% per annum. Petitioners herein being similarly situate to those of the petitioners in that petition (supra) filed representation dated 9.7.2014 (Annexure P-10) to respondent No.3, praying therein to extend benefit of revision of pay scale in their favour with effect from 1983 as has been done in the case of other Assistant Development Officers pursuant to judgment dated 27.11.2012 passed in CWPT No. 11365 of 2008. However fact remains that respondent No.3 rejected the aforesaid claim of the petitioners on the ground that judgment dated 27.11.2012, is /was applicable only to those petitioners, who had approached the High Court well within time and more so, for those, who being aggrieved with the anomaly in the pay scales approached the court by way of CWPT No. 11365 of 2008. Vide order dated 7.8.2014, respondent No.3 while rejecting the claim of the petitioners observed in the order that since petitioners being not aggrieved of anomaly, if any, in the revision in their pay scale, did not approach the court at that point of time, benefit of judgment dated 27.11.2012 cannot be extended in their favour being judgment in personam. In the aforesaid background, petitioners have approached this Court in the instant proceedings, praying therein for reliefs as has been reproduced herein above.

(3.) Having heard learned counsel for the parties and perused material available on record, this Court finds that counterparts of the petitioners herein had approached this Court by way of CWP(T) No. 11365 of 2008, seeking therein direction to the respondents to remove anomaly existing in the pay scales of Assistant Development Officers with effect from 1983. Coordinate Bench of this Court having taken note of the pleadings adduced on record by the respective parties in that case arrived at definite conclusion that prior to year 1978, pay scales of three categories i.e. Assistants, Accountants and Assistant Development Officers were same i.e. Rs. 160-400. Same parity was maintained upto 1.1.1978 when these categories were placed in the pay scale of Rs. 570-1080. The anomaly occurred in the year 1983 when the Assistants were granted the pay scale of Rs. 600-1120, but the Accountants and Assistant Development Officers were left out. The grievance of the Accountants was redressed by the Board by granting the pay scale at par with the Assistants, but again, the Assistant Development Officers were left out. In the general revision of pay scales, the anomaly still persisted whereby the Assistants and Accountants were granted pay scale of Rs. 1800-3200, but the Assistant Development officers were placed in the pay scale of Rs. 1500-2640. Coordinate Bench of this Court having taken note of the material placed before it specifically observed in para-7 of the judgment dated 27.11.2012 that respondents permitted anomaly to occur again when with effect from 1.1.1996, the categories of Assistants and Accountants have been granted the pay scale of Rs. 5800-9200 and the category of the Assistant Development Officers was granted the pay scales of Rs. 5000-8100/-. Aforesaid anomaly again was allowed to repeat in the general revision of pay scales with effect from 1.1.2006. In the aforesaid background, Coordinate Bench of this Court returned positive finding in the aforesaid judgment that it is quite apparent from the record that posts of Assistants, Accountant and Assistant Development Officers have been treated at par for the purpose of revision of pay scales upto 1.1.1978 and it is only in the year 1983 when the Assistant Development Officers were given the pay scale of Rs. 600-1120 but such benefit was denied to the accountants and Assistant Development Officers. Having taken note of the recommendations made by the Chief Executive Officer of the Board for revision of pay scale of the petitioners in that case, Coordinate Bench of this Court specifically concluded in its judgment that "it is not understandable that when the grievance of the Accountants has been redressed in the year 1985 by granting them the pay scale of Rs. 600-1120, why the Assistant Development Officers have been denied the same pay scale." Coordinate Bench of this Court further observed in its judgment that "there was further arbitrariness in the action of the respondent Board, whereby the pay scale of Rs. 1800-3200 has been confined to the Assistants and Accountants, but denied the same to the Assistant Development Officers." Case of the Assistant Development Officers came to be recommended for revision of pay scale by the respondent-Board as emerges from the various resolutions passed by the Board, which have been taken note of by the Coordinate Bench of this court in its judgment passed in CWPT No. 11365 of 2008.