IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA Civil Writ Petition (T) No. 5386 of 2008 Judgement reserved on: 10.9.2010. Date of decision: 28.10.2010. Arjun Singh …..Petitioner. Vs. H.P.S.E.B. & anr. …. Respondents. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Kuldip Singh, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 Yes For the petitioner : Mrs. Pratima Malhotra, Advocate. For the Respondents : Mrs. Anjula Khajuria, Advocate, for respondent No. 1. Mr. T.S.Chauhan, Advocate, for respondent No.2. Kuldip Singh, Judge. The petitioner has prayed for quashing of Annexure A-5 dated 4.9.1998 with a direction to respondents to implement the release of pay as given to others from 1.1.1986 vide Annexure A-2. It has also been prayed that respondents may be directed to consider the case of the petitioner for promotion to the post of Foreman. The respondents may be directed to pay the arrears of pay etc. to the petitioner alongwith interest at the rate of 18% per annum. 2. The case of the petitioner is that he joined as Air Compressor Cleaner work charged in the pay scale of `30-1-35 on 16.2.1968. He was promoted as Mixer Driver in the pay scale of Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the Judgment?Yes …2… `130-5-170, later on the designation of the petitioner was changed as Diesel Engine Driver. The scale of `130-5-170 was revised on 1.1.1978 to `400-15-600. This was revised to `570-1080 on 1.1.1986. 3. The petitioner is the only Diesel Engine Driver in H.P. State Electricity Board (Board) Operation Wing. The pay scale of `570-1080 was not released to petitioner. He filed O.A. No. 1578 of 1990, which was decided on 12.3.1997 and thereafter the petitioner was granted the pay scale of `570-1080. 4. On 10.1.1996 vide Annexure A-2 scale of pay `570- 1080 was revised to ` 1500-2640 and was further revised to `1800- 3200 w.e.f. 1.1.1986. The petitioner was not given the said pay scale, he filed representation Annexure A-3 requesting to release him the pay scale of `1800-3200/-. The representation of the petitioner was kept pending and he was granted pay scale of `1500-2640 w.e.f. 1.1.1986 instead of `1800-3200. The representation of the petitioner was later on rejected vide Annexure A-5 dated 4.9.1998. In these circumstances, the petitioner has filed the petition on the ground that pay scale of `570-1080 was revised to `1800-3200 w.e.f. 1.1.1986, therefore, petitioner is entitled to pay scale of `1800- 3200 w.e.f. 1.1.1986. The petitioner is entitled to revision of pay scale on the pattern of the Board and not on the pattern of Punjab State Electricity Board. The petitioner has not been considered for promotion to the post of Foreman despite being eligible. 5. The petition has been contested by the respondents by filing reply. It has been stated that erstwhile Tribunal allowed …3… OA No. 1578/90 of the petitioner and directed the respondents to give him improved pay scale of `570-1080 w.e.f. 1.4.1981 with all consequential benefits. The Board vide order dated 26.7.1997 Annexure RA-2 granted pay scale of `570-1080 to the category of Diesel Engine Driver w.e.f. 1.4.1981. The petitioner was granted pay scale of `1500-2640 as Diesel Engine Driver w.e.f. 1.1.1986 on the pattern of Punjab State Electricity Board, which was the demand of petitioner. The pay scale of `1800-3200 is not available to the category of Diesel Engine Driver in Punjab State Electricity Board and therefore, the petitioner is not entitled to the pay scale of `1800-3200 w.e.f. 1.1.1986. The Board has granted pay scale of `1500-2640 to the Diesel Engine Driver as per the order of the Tribunal. The case of promotion of the petitioner will be considered in order of seniority and subject to availability of post in the grade of Foreman (Light Machinery). At present the petitioner is at Serial No. 14 in the integrated seniority list. The respondents have prayed for dismissal of the petition. 6. The petitioner has filed rejoinder in which he has reiterated his case and denied the defence put forward by the respondents. In the rejoinder, he has stated that he never demanded pay scale on Punjab State Electricity Board pattern, rather his claim is against the Board for pay scale which the Board has granted to identical categories in the Board. He has stated that Punjab Electricity Board pay scales are not applicable to the Board employees. …4… 7. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties. The perusal of office order No. 6 dated 26.7.1997 Annexure A-4 indicates that consequent upon the grant of pay scale of `570-1080 to the category of Diesel Engine Driver w.e.f. 1.4.1981, the H.P. State Electricity Board has further pleased to revise the pay scale of `570- 1080 in respect of category of Diesel Engine Driver to `1500-2640 w.e.f. 1.1.1986 also on Punjab State Electricity Board pattern. The respondents in para 6 (3) (v) have stated that Board has granted pay scale of `1500-2640 to Diesel Engine Driver (applicant’s category) as per the order of the Tribunal. The erstwhile Tribunal in the order dated 12.3.1997 has held as follows: “4. We have perused Annexure R-3 dated 28.9.1991 relating to Engine Driver who were given the scale of `570-1080 w.e.f. 1.4.1981 and there is no reference to Diesel Engine Driver in the office order dated 28.9.1981 referred to above. Whereas Annexure P-4 only refers to Diesel Engine Drivers (Un-qualified) and there is no mention of Engine Driver in Annexure P-4. The Diesel Engine Driver have been given the revised pay scale of Diesel Engine Drivers (Un-qualified) for `400-660 was improved to `570-1080 w.e.f. April 1, 1981, the date prior to office order dated 28.9.1981. This document R-3 has no relevance in connection with Annexure P-4 in the facts and circumstances of the case, the defence taken by the respondent in their reply in para 6- a verified on March 22, 1991 has no relevance. On the perusal of the record we are of the view that the applicant who is of the category of Diesel Engine Driver and he was not given the scale of `130-200 revised to `400-600 from 1.1.1978 and improved to `570-1080 from 1.1.1981 and the respondents are un-justifiable in not giving this pay scale to the applicant. 5. In view of the above narration the application is allowed and the respondents are directed to give the applicant the improved pay scale of `570-1080 w.e.f. 1.4.1981 with all consequential benefits.” 8. The aforesaid order of the Tribunal nowhere indicates that the Tribunal had directed the respondents to give petitioner pay scale …5… of `1500-2640 or give him pay scale of Diesel Engine Driver as applicable in Punjab State Electricity Board. The petitioner has stated that he has not claimed the pay scale of Diesel Engine Driver as applicable in the Punjab State Electricity Board. The Board has taken the stand that it follows the pay pattern of Punjab State Electricity Board but no such decision of the Board has been placed on record. In these circumstances, it is not possible to accept the contention of the Board that for all categories of employees the Board follows the pay scale of Punjab State Electricity Board. 9. The perusal of office order No. 2. dated 10.1.1996 indicates that pay scale of `1500-2640 was revised to pay scale of `1800-3200 w.e.f. 1.1.1986 for different categories of operators and drivers. The Diesel Engine Driver is not specifically mentioned in the office order No. 2 dated 10.1.1996. The respondents have not given any legally acceptable reason for not releasing the pay scale of `1800-3200 to Diesel Engine Driver w.e.f. 1.1.1986 even though on 1.1.1986 the Diesel Engine Driver was given the pay scale of `1500- 2640 as per office order No. 6 dated 26.7.1997 Annexure A-4. The respondents have erroneously construed that Tribunal had directed to give pay scale of `1500-2640 to petitioner and no other scale. In fact, the Tribunal in OA No. 1578/90 had directed to give the petitioner improved pay scale of `570-1080 w.e.f. 1.1.1981 with all consequential benefits. The office order No. 2 dated 10.1.1996 indicates that for different categories of operators and drivers ` 570- 1080 scale revised to `1500-2640 on 1.1.1986 was further revised to `1800-3200 w.e.f. 1.1.1986. Once the Board had given the pay scale …6… of `1500-2640 to petitioner w.e.f. 1.1.1986, therefore, the petitioner is further entitled to revision of his scale `1500-2640 to `1800-3200 w.e.f. 1.1.1986 when the Board has given to other operators and drivers `1800-3200 scale vide office order No. 2 dated 10.1.1996. In not giving further revised pay scale of `1800-3200 w.e.f. 1.1.1986, the Board has arbitrarily discriminated the petitioner. In these circumstances, the petitioner is entitled to further revised pay scale of `1800-3200 w.e.f. 1.1.1986. 10. The petitioner has also put forward his grievance for not considering his case for promotion to the post of Foreman. In the reply, the Board has taken the stand that the case of the petitioner will be considered at appropriate stage. In integrated seniority list, the petitioner is at Serial No. 14 and his case for promotion to the post of Foreman will be considered at the appropriate time. The petitioner has failed to place anything on record to sow that any person junior to him has been promoted as Foreman by the Board by superseding him. In these circumstances, the petitioner has failed to make out any case for a direction to respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for promotion for the post of Foreman. 11. The result of the above discussion the petition is partly allowed. The respondents are directed to release the pay scale of `1800-3200 to petitioner w.e.f. 1.1.1986 and pay arrears to the petitioner within a period of three months from the date of furnishing a copy of this judgement by the petitioner to the competent authority, failing which the respondents shall pay to petitioner interest at the …7… rate of 9% per annum on such arrears till payment. All the pending application(s) stand disposed of. October 28, 2010. ( Kuldip Singh ), (Hem) Judge.