BUDHI RAM JASTA Vs. STATE OF H.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER was appointed as Steno -Typist in the Department of Industries on 11.4.1977. He was promoted to the post of Junior Scale Stenographer on 11.4.1979 and Senior Scale stenographer on 11.4.1989. He was placed in the pay scale of Rs. 5800 -9200. Thereafter Petitioner was granted next pay scale of Rs. 6400 -10640 on the basis of Assured Career Progression Scheme. Petitioner was sent on deputation in the Himachal Pradesh Secretariat, as Junior Scale Stenographer on the basis of letter dated 20.2.1999. He joined his duties on 26.6.1999. He was absorbed in the Himachal Pradesh Secretariat on 10.10.2000. His pay was fixed under FR 22 and he started drawing salary of Rs. 8925/. However, the salary of the Petitioner was reduced as per Annexure A -2 from Rs. 8925/ - to Rs. 8100/ - that too, retrospectively. Petitioner approached the learned erstwhile Himachal Pradesh Administrative Tribunal for the redressal of his grievance by filing OA No. 2593/2005. The same was decided by the Tribunal on 21.10.2005 and was directed to be treated as representation to the Chief Secretary. He rejected the same on 30.1.2006.

(2.) MR . Ajay Mohan Goel has strenuously argued that the pay of the Petitioner has been fixed correctly, as per the provisions contained in FR 22 (1) (a) (ii), by treating the dues, as personal pay. He further contended that the Petitioner has not been heard before the decision was taken to reduce the salary from Rs. Rs. 8925/ - to Rs. 8100/ - According to him, similarly situate persons on the basis of letter dated 26.3.1991, who were absorbed in the Himachal Pradesh Secretariat, were given the benefit by invoking the provisions of FR 5 (a). In other words, his submission is that his client has been discriminated against.

(3.) I have heard the learned Counsel for the parties and have perused the pleadings carefully.