IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. CWP No. 10166-CAT of 2009 (O&M) Date of Decision: December 3, 2009 Union Territory of Chandigarh and others …Petitioners Versus Surinder Mohan Wadehra and others …Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M. KUMAR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASWANT SINGH Present: Mrs. Lisa Gill, Standing Counsel for U.T. Chandigarh, for the petitioners. Mr. M.K. Tiwari, Advocate, for respondent No. 1. 1. To be referred to the Reporter or not? 2. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? M.M. KUMAR, J. This petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution challenges order dated 30.1.2008 (P-1), passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench, Chandigarh (for brevity, ‘the Tribunal’) in O.A. No. 776/CH/2006. The Tribunal has allowed the Original Application filed by the applicant-respondent No. 1 in terms of its earlier decision dated 3.5.2005 rendered in the case of Kewal Krishan v. Union of India and others (O.A. No. CWP No. 10166-CAT of 2009 1064/CH/2003) and directed the petitioner-Union Territory of Chandigarh to extend the benefit of revised pay scales to the applicant-respondent No. 1 at par with his counterparts for fixation of pay on notional basis. It has further been directed that the applicant- respondent No. 1 would not be entitled to any actual benefits but his pensionary benefits would be recalculated on the basis of revised pay fixed after grant of such higher pay scales from due dates again on notional basis by calculating the same on the basis of pay and allowances for the last 10 months, as if he had actually drawn the same. The applicant-respondent No. 1 has also been held entitled to actual benefits of revised pensionary benefits w.e.f. 18 months prior to filing of the OA and onwards. The OA was filed on 28.11.2006. It is pertinent to notice that in its order dated 3.5.2005 passed in the case of Kewal Krishan (supra) the Tribunal issued the directions, relevant extracts of which are as under:- “8. Considering the contents of notification dated 13.1.1992, enforcing the rules known as the Conditions of Service of UT Chandigarh Employees Rules,1992 and the clear stand taken by the respondents in the written statement, we hold that the aplicants are also entitled to the benefits of higher scales of pay w.e.f. the dates as claimed in this OA at par with the benefits allowed to their counterparts by three judgments supporting the judgment dated 11.7.1996 and decisions, Annexures A-2 & A-3 by re-fixation of their pay in notional basis. The 2 CWP No. 10166-CAT of 2009 applicants would have to be held entitled to the actual benefits in terms of monetary benefits actually w.e.f. the date which falls within eighteen months prior to the filing of the present OA. Since respondent State of Punjab has granted the benefits subject to the decision in LPA No.1438/01 arising out of COCP No.735/97 the benefits being made available to the conditions imposed by the Hon'ble High Court in its judgment dated August 5,2003 in CWP No.4343/03. We are observing this notwithstanding the fact that dismissal of the SLP against judgment dated 11.7.1996 by the Hon'ble Supreme Court the judgment of Hon'ble High Court in relevant CWP has attained finality. We also record that one SLP arising from judgment and order dated 30.8.2001, in CM No.25781/01 and 5398/01 in LPA 1438/01 as rendered by Hon'ble High Court of Punjab & Haryana has been dismissed on 22.4.2002. Respondents are at liberty to impose the similar conditions as mentioned in Annexure A-2 and A-3 while extending the benefits of those two judgments rendered by the Hon'ble High Court of Punjab and Haryana. 9. Before parting with this judgment we observe that we have noticed the judgment in the case of Kanhaiya Lal and Others v Chandigarh Administration etc. Reference to this judgment notice in view of judgment 3 CWP No. 10166-CAT of 2009 rendered by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of U.T. Chandigarh and others vs. Rajesh Kumar Basandhi 2004 (1) SCT page 68 in which it has been held that there is no need of passing of separate order by Chandigarh Administration for adopting decisions taken or amendments made by State of Punjab on the rights of its employees when extension of benefits to the holders of corresponding posts under Chandigarh Administration has to be considered. In our opinion, the benefit of judgment particularly of higher court to similarly placed persons has to be extended under the law, though actual benefits can always be restricted with reference to period of limitation. 10. In view of above discussion, this OA is allowed. The applicants are entitled as mentioned above to the revised scales of pay at par with their counterparts in State of Punjab as prayed for in the OA for fixation of pay on notional basis. They shall, however, be paid actual monetary benefits only for that period which falls within eighteen months prior to the date of filing of this OA. Respondents shall comply with the above- mentioned directions within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order which may be made subject to the decision in LPA No.1438/01 and further subject to the conditions which may be imposed 4 CWP No. 10166-CAT of 2009 by Chandigarh Administration similar to the conditions imposed by State of Punjab in Annexures A-2 and A-3. It is pertinent to notice that the Tribunal has also taken into account the pay scale given to the similarly situated Senior Medical Laboratory Technicians and Medical Laboratory Technicians in the State of Punjab, Department of Health and Family Welfare, in pursuance of judgment dated 11.7.1996 rendered by a Division Bench of this Court in CWP Nos. 13425 and 13426 of 1995. The judgment was implemented by the State of Punjab on 11.2.2003. A number of similarly situated employees kept on approaching the High Court for issuance of directions by filing various writ petitions of which notice was taken by the Tribunal. The State of Punjab filed SLP Nos. 7358 of 1997 and 7432 of 1997 against the directions issued by the Division Bench, dated 11.7.1996, which were dismissed on 3.10.1997. Accordingly the directions issued on 11.7.1996 attained finality. Consequently the scales of the Senior Medical Laboratory Technicians and Medical Laboratory Technicians working in the Department of Health and Family Welfare, Punjab, as were claimed in Kewal Krishan's case (supra) were accepted and re-fixed. It was in view of the aforesaid situation that the Tribunal allowed the application filed by Kewal Krishan and others. It is also apposite to notice here that keeping in view notification dated 13.1.1992, which is titled as 'Conditions of Service of UT Chandigarh Employees Rules, 1992', the employees of the Chandigarh Administration have been held entitled to the pay scales 5 CWP No. 10166-CAT of 2009 at par with the employees of the State of Punjab. Accordingly, it was held by the Tribunal that Kewal Krishan and others were also entitled to the benefit of higher scales of pay w.e.f. the date as claimed in the O.A., at par with the benefit allowed to their counterparts by the judgment of this Court dated 11.7.1996 and subsequent decisions taken by the Administration. The aforesaid direction issued by the Tribunal has been implemented by order dated 5.12.2005. The only rider added is that the implementation would be subject to decision in LPA No.1438 of 2001 and other conditions which may be imposed by the petitioner-Chandigarh Administration. The beneficiary of the order dated 11.7.1996 passed by a Division Bench of this Court in CWP Nos. 13425 and 13426 of 1995 filed COCP No. 735 of 1997, which eventually came up for consideration before the Contempt Judge on 13.9.2000. The State of Punjab had filed LPA No. 1438 of 2001 against the order dated 13.9.2000 passed in COCP No. 735 of 1997. The principal ground urged in the LPA was that unwarranted interpretation has been placed on the judgment dated 11.7.1996 passed by this Court in CWP Nos. 13425 and 13426 of 1995. However, the interpretation given by this Court on 13.9.2000 and the directions issued on 11.7.1996 had attained finality when on behalf of the State of Punjab it was stated before the Contempt Court that directions issued by this Court on 13.9.2000 have been implemented and COCP No.735 of 1997 was disposed of on 11.2.2003. Therefore, no impediment would survive in the implementation of the directions issued by the Tribunal in the 6 CWP No. 10166-CAT of 2009 case of the present applicant-respondent No. 1, who had filed OA No. 776/CH of 2006. Ms. Lisa Gill, learned counsel for the petitioners has stated that an appropriate decision in the case of the applicant- respondent No. 1 shall be taken within a period of one month from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. In view of the above, the instant petition fails and the same is dismissed. The directions issued by the Tribunal shall be implemented within one month from the date of receipt of copy of this order as per the undertaking given by the learned counsel for the Union Territory, Chandigarh. However, the monetary benefits are restricted to 38 months. The writ petition stands disposed of in the above terms. (M.M. KUMAR) JUDGE (JASWANT SINGH) December 3, 2009 JUDGE Pkapoor 7