IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA Civil Writ Petition (T) No. 4529 of 2008 (OA No. 1624 of 1997). Judgement reserved on: 9.9.2009. Date of decision: October 30, 2009. Shiv Ram Pal & ors. …..Petitioner. Vs. H.P. University & anr. …. Respondents. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Kuldip Singh, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? 1 For the petitioner(s) : Mr. K.C.Sankhyan, Advocate. For the Respondents : Mr. Vinod Thakur, Advocate, for respondent No. 1. Mr. R.K. Sharma, Senior Addl. Advocate General with and Mr. A.K. Bansal, Additional Advocate General and Mr. R.P.Singh, Asstt. Advocate General, for respondent No. 2. Kuldip Singh, Judge. O.A. No. 1624 of 1997 was filed in the H.P. Administrative Tribunal, which was later on abolished and the cases of erstwhile Tribunal were transferred to this court. On transfer, O.A. No. 1624 of 1997 has been registered in this court as CWP (T) No. 4529 of 2008. 2. The petitioners in the petition have prayed that respondents may be directed to revise the pay scale of Semi Professional Assistants/ Catalogue Typists from Rs. 125-300 to Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the Judgment? …2… Rs.300-600 w.e.f. 1.11.1966 and subsequent revised pay scales at par with the pay scales allowed from time to time by the H.P. Government be given to the Semi Professional Assistants/ Catalogue Typists. It has also been prayed that respondents may be directed to place the petitioners in the pay scale of Rs.1650-2900 w.e.f. the dates of their appointments as Semi Professional Assistants/ Catalogue Typists and their pay be re-fixed accordingly, the arrears of pay be also ordered to be released alongwith interest to the petitioners. 3. The grievance of the petitioners for non-revision of pay scale of Semi Professional Assistants/ Catalogue Typists in H.P. University Library from Rs. 125-300 to Rs.300-600 w.e.f. 1.11.1966 is primarily based on the allegations that petitioners were appointed as Library Attendants in respondent No. 1 -University in the year 1979 and 1981. They were promoted to the posts of Semi Professional Assistants in October 1990. The petitioners have pleaded staffing pattern of Library Staff in respondent No. 1- University as follows:- University Librarian Pay Scale Rs.4500-7300 Deputy Librarian Rs. 3700-5700 Assistant Librarian/ Rs. 2200-4000 Ist Professional Assistant Rs. 2200-4000 Senior Professional Assistants Rs. 2200-4000 Junior Professional Assistant Rs. 1650-2900 Semi Professional Assistant/ Rs. 1500-2640 Catalogue Typist. The petitioners have also pleaded staffing pattern of Library Staff in the Education Department of the Government as follows:- Librarian Pay Scale Rs. 300-600 as on 1.11.1966. Assistant Pay Scale Rs.125-300 …3… Librarian as on 1.11.1966 Now revised to Rs.300-600 w.e.f. 1.11.1966. It has been alleged that initially the pay scale of Semi Professional Assistants was Rs.125-300 as on 1.11.1966. 4. The further case of the petitioners is that Assistant Librarian in the Education Department of H.P. Government is equivalent to the post of Semi Professional Assistant in respondent No. 1 – University. The pay scale of Assistant Librarian in the Education Department was initially Rs. 125-300 as on 1.11.1966. The qualification for the two posts is also the same i.e. Matriculation with certificate in Library Science. It has been alleged that as per Annexure A-2 dated 3.2.1981, the post of Assistant Librarian in the Government Department is equivalent to the post of Semi Professional Assistants (Library) and initially the pay scale of the post was Rs.125-300 before its revision on 1.1.1978. The respondent No. 1 – University has adopted the pay pattern of H.P. Government and as such the pay scale is given to the employees of respondent No. 1 corresponding to the categories in Government Department. The petitioners have thus pleaded that they as Semi Professional Assistants (Library) are entitled to the pay scale of Assistant Librarian of Education Department of H.P. Government. 5. It has been further alleged that vide notification dated 16.6.1994 the pay scale of Assistant Librarian in the Education Department was revised from Rs.125-300 to Rs. 300-600 w.e.f. 1.11.1966 and they have been allowed subsequent pay scale from time to time by H.P. Government. Therefore, the pay scale of Semi …4… Professional Assistants/ Catalogue Typists of Rs. 125-300 as on 1.11.1966 is required to be revised to Rs.300-600 w.e.f. 1.11.1966 at par with the Education Department of Government of H.P., but the same has not been revised till date. 6. The petitioners after notification dated 16.6.1994 made a representation to respondent No. 1- University for releasing them pay scale of Rs. 300-600 w.e.f. 1.11.1966, but respondent No. 1 - University except giving oral assurance to settle the claim of the petitioners has done nothing substantive to release the pay scale of Rs.300-600 to petitioners w.e.f. 1.11.1966. The petitioners have pleaded that non-revision of pay scale of Semi Professional Assistants/ Catalogue Typists from Rs. 125-300 to Rs. 300-600 from 1.1.1966 is illegal, arbitrary and against the principle of natural justice. 7. The respondent No. 1- University has contested the petition by filing reply. It has been pleaded that claim of the petitioners for revision of pay scale from Rs. 125-300 to Rs. 300-600 is unjustified inasmuch as respondent No. 1- University was established on 22.7.1970, whereas the petitioners are claiming the pay scale w.e.f. 1.11.1966. It has been submitted that except petitioner No. 4 other petitioners were initially appointed in the University as Library Attendants and petitioner No. 4 was initially appointed as Library Restorer. The petitioners No. 1 to 4 were promoted in the pay scale of Rs.510-800 to the posts of Semi Professional Assistants and petitioners No. 5 and 6 were promoted as Catalogue Typists on various dates as pleaded in the reply. The pay scale of Semi Professional Assistants and Catalogue Typists was …5… revised from Rs. 125-300 to Rs. 510-800 w.e.f. 1.1.1978 and further to Rs. 1200-2100 w.e.f. 1.1.1986 and was modified by respondent No. 1- University to Rs. 1500-2640 w.e.f. 1.1.1986. The Semi Professional Assistants and Catalogue Typists on the date of filing the reply were in the pay scale of Rs. 5000-8100 w.e.f. 1.1.1996. 8. The posts of Semi Professional Assistants and Catalogue Typists in the Library were created for the first time on 30.6.1973 in the pay scale of Rs. 125-300. The posts of Semi Professional Assistants and Catalogue Typists in the Library is a feeder category to the post of Junior Professional Assistant. The pay scale of Junior Professional Assistants was revised to Rs. 300-600 w.e.f. 1.11.1966, which was revised to Rs.1659-2900 w.e.f. 1.1.1986. The petitioners have no right to claim the scale of Rs.300-600 w.e.f. 1.11.1966. The posts of Assistant Librarian in the Education Department of State Government have no parity with the posts of Semi Professional Assistants and Catalogue Typists in the University, therefore, the Semi Professional Assistants are not entitled to pay scale of Assistant Librarians of Education Department. The petitioners have filed rejoinder, wherein they have reiterated their stand while contesting the stand of respondent No. 1- University. 9. Heard the learned counsel for the parties. The petitioners as Semi Professional Assistants/ Catalogue Typists want parity of pay scale with Assistant Librarian of Education Department and have claimed pay revision from Rs. 125-300 to Rs. 300-600 w.e.f. 1.11.1966. In the staffing pattern of library staff in respondent No. 1- University, Semi Professional Assistants/ Catalogue Typists are at …6… lowest hierarchy as per the pleadings of the petitioners. In the Education Department, the Assistant Librarians are at lowest level. The respondent No.1- University has taken the stand that posts of Assistant Librarian in the Education Department of State Government have no parity with the posts of Semi Professional Assistant and Catalogue Typists in the University and for that reason according to respondent No.1- University the Semi Professional Assistants are not entitled to pay scale of Assistant Librarian of Education Department. The petitioners have not placed enough material on record to establish their parity with Assistant Librarian of Education Department for claiming pay scale of Assistant Librarian of Education Department on the principles of equal pay for equal work. It is also the case of respondent No.1- University that Semi Professional Assistants and Catalogue Typists in the University is a feeder category to the posts of Junior Professional Assistants. The pay scale of Junior Professional Assistant was revised to Rs. 300-600 w.e.f. 1.11.1966. It has been contended that once the posts of Semi Professional Assistants and Catalogue Typists in the University is a feeder category to the post of Junior Professional Assistants who were placed in the pay scale of Rs. 300-600 w.e.f. 1.11.1966, therefore, Semi Professional Assistants and Catalogue Typists in the University, who are lower in hierarchy in comparison to Junior Professional Assistant are not entitled to the pay scale of Rs. 300-600 w.e.f. 1.11.1966 which was pay scale of Junior Professional Assistants. 10. The learned counsel for the petitioners has relied Annexure A-2 the communication dated 3.2.1981 of Deputy Secretary …7… to the Government of Himachal Pradesh addressed to Comptroller, HPKV, Palampur. The subject of said letter is of revision of pay scales of some categories of employees of the University, whose designation and scale are different than that of the employees of State Government employees w.e.f. 1.1.1978. The learned counsel for the petitioners has relied item No. 8 of Annexure A-2 relating to Semi Professional Assistants (Library), who were in the pay scale of Rs.125-300. In the letter the Finance Department had proposed the scale of Rs.450-800 to Semi Professional Assistants ( Library) which was being given to Librarian/ Assistant Librarian in the same existing scale under the Government. The Annexure A-2 is only a proposal and nothing beyond that. 11. The learned counsel for the petitioners has relied Union of India and others vs. Debashis Kar and others 1995 Supp. (3) SCC 528. In that case the question before the Apex Court was whether draughtsmen employed in the Ordnance Factories and the Workshops of E.M.E. in the Ministry of Defence are entitled to have their pay scales revised on the basis of the Office Memorandum of the Government of India, Ministry of Finance dated 13.3.1984. On those facts, the Hon’ble Supreme Court has held that the pay scales fixed on the basis of the First, Second and Third Pay Commissions show that Tracer in Ordnance Factories has all along been treated as equivalent to Tracer/ Draughtsman Grade III in C.P.W.D. and Draughtsman in Ordnance Factories has all along been treated as equivalent to Assistant Draughtsman/ Draughtsman Grade II in C.P.W.D. As a result of the revision of pay scales in C.P.W.D. on the …8… basis of the award of the Board of Arbitration, the pay scale of Draughtsman Grade III was revised to Rs. 330-560, while that of Draughtsman Grade II was revised to Rs. 425-700 and of Draughtsman Grade I was revised to Rs. 550-750. The denial of similar revision of pay scale to Draughtsmen in Ordnance Factories would result in their being downgraded to the level of Tracer/ Draughtsman Grade III in C.P.W.D. The office memorandum dated 13.3.1984 cannot be construed as having such an effect. In the present case, the question is entirely different. The petitioners are claiming parity of pay scale with Assistant Librarians of Education Department. They have placed nothing on record to show that they have legal right to claim parity of pay scale of Assistant Librarian of Education Department on the basis of some decision of University. 12. The learned counsel for the petitioners has also relied Alvaro Noronha Ferriera and another vs. Union of India and others (1999) 4 SCC 408 on the point of equal pay for equal work. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in that case has held that principle of equal pay for equal work has gained judicial recognition. The principle incorporated in Article 14 when understood from the angle provided in Article 39(d) of the Constitution is held to be recognition of the aforesaid doctrine. The principle is not an abstract doctrine but one of substance. Parameters for invoking the doctrine would include, inter alia, nature of work and common employer. In the present case, the respondent No.1- University has taken a specific stand that the posts of Assistant Librarian in the Education Department of State Government have no parity with the posts of Semi Professional …9… Assistants and Catalogue Typists in the University. This stand of the University has not been countered by the petitioners by placing on record material so as to come to the conclusion that the posts of Assistant Librarian in the Education Department has parity with the posts of Semi Professional Assistants and Catalogue Typists in the University. The Assistant Librarian in the Education Department has different employer whereas the employer of petitioners is respondent No. 1- University. In these circumstances, Alvaro Noronha Ferriera and another (supra) is not applicable. 13. The learned counsel for the petitioners has lastly relied judgement dated 2.2.1977 in CWP No. 8441 of 1976 of Punjab and Haryana High Court. In that case, according to the conditions of service of Union Territory Chandigarh Employees Rules, 1956, the scale of the petitioners was revised but the Director of Public Instructions, Chandigarh Administration added a rider to the effect that the revised scale was not applicable to those working in the scale of Rs. 125-300 as they did not have common seniority with the Librarians. On the facts of that case, the court held that there is no justification in the rider imposed by the Director of Public Instructions Union Territory and therefore the writ petition was allowed. 14. In the present case, no rule has been pointed out by the learned counsel for the petitioners in support of his submissions that as a matter of right the petitioners are entitled to the parity of pay scale of Assistant Librarians of Education Department. The petitioners have miserably failed to point out the parity in the posts of Assistant Librarian in the Education Department and Semi …10… Professional Assistants/ Catalogue Typists of the University. There is substance in the stand of the University that Semi Professional Assistants/ Catalogue Typists in the University is a feeder category to the posts of Junior Professional Assistant, which is a promotional post. The Junior Professional Assistants were granted revised pay scale from Rs. 125-300 to Rs. 300-600 w.e.f. 1.11.1966 and in the teeth of this factual position the Semi Professional Assistants/ Catalogue Typists holding Junior posts cannot be given the pay scale of Rs. 300-600 w.e.f. 1.11.1966. The petition was filed on 23.8.1997 and the petitioners are claiming relief w.e.f. 1.11.1966 without explaining the delay and laches. There is no merit in the petition. Accordingly, the petition is dismissed with no orders as to costs. October 30, 2009. ( Kuldip Singh ), (Hem) Judge.