J.N.SHARMA Vs. STATE OF H.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD and gone through the record.

(2.) IN the year 1998, when notification of Rules, pertaining to revision of pay -scales, effective from 1st January, 1996, was issued by the State of Himachal Pradesh, Petitioner was working as Superintending Engineer, while two persons Shri S.K. Malhotra and Shri D.R. Gupta, named in the present petition, were working as Executive Engineers. Petitioner 'spay, as Superintending Engineer, was fixed at Rs.15,100/ -, as on 1st January, 1996, vide Annexure A -1. His pay in the pre - revised pay -scale or existing pay -scale was Rs.5,300/ -, on the aforesaid date. The pre -revised pay - scale was Rs.4,500 -6,100. His pay was fixed at Rs.15,100/ -, by giving him benefit of two increments, on account of bunching. In the case of Shri S.K. Malhotra, above named, his existing pay -scale was Rs.3,700 -5,300 and his pay in that scale was Rs.5,150/ -, as on 1st January, 1996. His pay was, however, fixed at Rs.15,900/ -. He was given the benefit of four increments, by following the rule of bunching. Because of this, pay of Shri S.K. Malhotra got fixed at a stage higher than that of the Petitioner. Admittedly, he was junior to the Petitioner and his pay in the existing pay -scale was also lower than that of the Petitioner and that too in a lower pay -scale. Similarly, Shri D.R. Gupta, Executive Engineer, was also in the existing pay -scale of Rs.3,700 -5,300, with basic pay at Rs.5,300/ -. His pay was also fixed at Rs.15,900/ -.

(3.) RESPONDENTS , in their reply, took the stand that pay of Shri S.K. Malhotra and Shri D.R. Gupta, above named, had been wrongly fixed and that when the mistake came to their notice, they re - fixed their pay, vide Annexures R -1 and R -2, at Rs.15,100/ -, as on 1st January, 1996 and, therefore, grievance, if any, of the Petitioner comes to an end.