`IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. C.W.P. No.16762 of 2009 Date of decision: 29.7.2010 Dhan Pal Singh Rathore. -----Petitioner. Vs. Union of India and others. -----Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOEL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL Present:- Mr. Pawan Kumar, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Saqib Ali Khan, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. A.S. Grewal, Sr. Panel Counsel for respondent No.1. Ms. Lisa Gill, Advocate for respondent No.2. --- ADARSH KUMAR GOEL, J. 1. This petition seeks quashing of order of the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) dated 21.10.2008, Annexure P-4, rejecting the claim of the petitioner for arrears of pay grade of Rs.940-1850/- w.e.f. 13.10.1978 along with 18% interest and for calculation of pensionary benefits and fixation of pension of the petitioner from 13.10.1978 by revising the pension of the petitioner. 2. Case of the petitioner is that he was serving with Zila Sainik Board, Group-II, Chandigarh. He was initially working as Secretary and his designation was changed to Welfare Officer CWP No.16762 of 2009 w.e.f. 13.10.1978. The Punjab Pay scale for the said post was revised w.e.f. 1.1.1978 to Rs.940-1850/- but as far as the petitioner is concerned the said scale was allowed to him only w.e.f. 1.1.1986. He raised the grievance that he should also be allowed the same scale w.e.f. 1.1.1986 and filed an application before the CAT relying upon the provisions of the Conditions of service of Union Territory Employees Rules, 1966, providing that the Chandigarh Administration could also adopt the pay scale applicable to corresponding post in Punjab. The said claim was contested on the ground that the Chandigarh Administration having not adopted the said scale from earlier date, the claim of the petitioner could not be accepted. The petition filed by the petitioner being O.A. No.301/CS/1992 was dismissed by the CAT on 27.2.1992 for non-appearance of the applicant. Counsel for the respondents was present. Thereafter, the petitioner made fresh application to the Anomaly Committee, which was rejected on 11.12.2006 on the ground that claim of the petitioner had already been rejected, against which the petitioner filed a fresh application before the CAT, which has been dismissed on the ground that rejection of earlier application was on merits. It was held that no order having been passed by the Chandigarh Administration, on the pattern of pay scales adopted by the Punjab Government, the petitioner had no cause of action. 3. We have heard learned counsel for the parties. 2 CWP No.16762 of 2009 4. It was not disputed that claim of the petitioner which was rejected by the Anomaly Committee was based on the same cause of action on which the petitioner had earlier approached the CAT and application was dismissed in default after service of the respondents and in the presence of counsel for the respondents. No steps were taken to have the said application restored. In such situation, on the principle of Order 9 Rule 9 of the Code of Civil Procedure, the second application was barred, as rightly held by the Tribunal. On merits also, in absence of order having been passed by the Chandigarh Administration, revision of pay scale w.e.f. 1.1.1978 could not be claimed by the petitioner. 5. We, thus, do not find any ground to interfere. The petition is dismissed. (ADARSH KUMAR GOEL) JUDGE July 29, 2010 ( AJAY KUMAR MITTAL ) ashwani JUDGE 3