RAJ KUMAR MISHRA Vs. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petition has been filed on the following prayers vide para 7(I) and (II): I -That the present O.A. may kindly be allowed and the salary as ordered to be fixed vide Annexure A -2 may kindly be declared as void ab initio and set aside. II -That the Respondents be directed to pay the revised pay scale from the initial date of appointment.

(2.) THE Respondents have taken the following stand Vide para 3 of the reply: That the applicant ahs no cause of action to file the present original application as they are not entitled fro the benefit of merger of 50% Dearness Allowance with Basic pay. It is submitted that the service rules as applicable to the regular employees are not applicable to the contract employees. It is submitted that the applicants at the time of accepting contract appointment has entered into an agreement with his employer whereby it was agreed upon that they shall be paid pre -revised pay scale of Rs. 1800 -3200, therefore, there services are governed by the contract policy as well as terms and conditions of contract agreement. It is further submitted that pay scale of regular employees were revised w.e.f 1.1.1996 vide notification dated 20.1'.1998 which clearly provides that it shall not be applicable to the: Persons employed on contract basis except when the contract provides otherwise. It is further submitted that contract agreement nowhere provides that contract appointees shall be granted revised pay scale from time to time copy of agreement of applicant No. 2 is annexed as annexure R -1 for the kind perusal of this Hon 'ble Tribunal. Therefore, the parties to the contract are bound by the agreement, which determines the liabilities and duties of the parties. As such, the Finance Department office memorandum dated 1 -6 -2005 is also not applicable in case of contract employees, who are governed by the specific conditions of their contracts governing their appointments. It is worth mentioning that the applicants were engaged on contract basis after the revised pay scale was given to the regular employees of Himachal Pradesh. However, the applicants voluntarily agreed to serve on the honorarium of 1800 -3200 and they are estoped from repudiating the very clause which was agreed to by the applicants. The sub Clause 5 of Clause 4 is reproduced herein below for the kind perusal of the Hon 'ble Tribunal. The Govt. of Himachal Pradesh shall pay the teachers so long as the teachers shall remain in the service and actually perform his/her duties monthly honorarium equal to of the basic pay in the pay scale of Rs. 1800 -3200 and other allowances admissible at the station on the basic pay including HRA and CCA. The teachers shall not be entitled for any further benefit. In view of the position as stated above the applicants are not entitled to the revised pay scale as per specific notification issued in this behalf and the consequence of merger of D.A. is flowing from the said scheme of revised pay scale.

(3.) IN view of the above, if on facts, the case of the Petitioners is covered under the aforesaid judgment dated 17.11.2009, in CWP(T) No. 14232 of 2008 and they are also similarly situate, they shall be treated similarly without any discrimination and the benefit of the said judgment be extended to them, within three months from the date of production of copy of this judgment by the Petitioners. Needless to say consequential benefits, if any, would follow.