IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. C.W.P. No. 11135 of 2009 DATE OF DECISION : 28.07.2009 H.L. Sharma .... PETITIONER Versus Haryana Power Generation Corporation Ltd. and others ..... RESPONDENTS CORAM :- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SATISH KUMAR MITTAL Present: Mr. Maharaj Kumar, Advocate, for the petitioner. * * * SATISH KUMAR MITTAL , J. ( Oral ) The petitioner is working as Master Foreman in the office of Executive Engineer/Electrical Maintenance Division – II, Stage – II, Haryana Power Generation Corporation Limited, Panipat Thermal Power Station – I, Panipat. He has filed the instant petition for issuing direction to the respondents to re-fix his pay, giving him the benefit of four special increments in terms of the decision taken on 9.12.1987 by the Standing Committee of Panipat Thermal Power Station. It is the case of the petitioner that when his services were regularised on the post of Foreman, he was given the benefit of four special increments on account of his work-charge service. Subsequently, contrary to the above decision of the Standing Committee, the respondents have CWP No. 11135 of 2009 -2- illegally reduced the pay scale of the petitioner from Rs. 1020/- to Rs. 850/-, by excluding the aforesaid benefit of four special increments. Thereafter, the petitioner made representation and in the year 2005, the Chief Engineer O/M – I, Panipat Thermal Power Station, Panipat, vide its memo dated 29.6.2005, asked the Senior Accounts Officer to re-fix the pay of the petitioner, while allowing him the benefit of four special increments in terms of the decision dated 9.12.1987 of the Standing Committee. It is the case of the petitioner that his service book has been sent on three occasions to the office of Senior Accounts Officer/Pay Fixation, Panchkula, for re-fixation of his pay in accordance with the said decision, but the respondents have not taken any final decision on the same. The petitioner has also met the Financial Adviser/Head Quarter, Haryana Power General Corporation Ltd., Panchkula (respondent No.3 herein), but he is not taking any final decision. The representation dated 10.11.2008 (Annexure P-6) made by the petitioner to the Managing Director, Haryana Power General Corporation Ltd., is still pending. In view of these facts, counsel for the petitioner states that the petitioner will be satisfied if respondent No.3 is directed to consider and decide the issue of re-fixation of the pay of the petitioner in terms of the decision dated 9.12.1987 taken by the Standing Committee of Panipat Thermal Power Station. In view of the above, without issuing notice of motion as it will un-necessary delay the matter, this petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent No.3 to consider the claim of the petitioner with regard to re- CWP No. 11135 of 2009 -3- fixation of his pay in terms of the decision dated 9.12.1987 taken by the Standing Committee of Panipat Thermal Power Station, within a period of three months, by passing a speaking order. July 28, 2009 ( SATISH KUMAR MITTAL ) ndj JUDGE