CWP No. 18302 of 2008 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. DATE OF DECISION: 28.9.2010 Lila Dhar Gupta & Anr. ...Petitioners VERSUS Board of Directors and others …Respondents CORAM HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE PERMOD KOHLI PRESENT: Mr.MPS Mann, Advocate for the petitioners Mr.KK Gupta, Advocate for respondents Permod Kohli, J. (Oral) Keeping in view the controversy involved and with the consent of the counsel, this petition is disposed of at motion stage. The petitioners were appointed as Clerks in March 1990 and October, 1990 respectively in the pay scale of Rs.950-1800. Their increments thus became due in March and October respectively. In the year 1998 recommendation of the 4th Pay Commission was implemented by the Punjab Government vide Notification dated 16.1.1998. The revised pay scales were made effective from 1.1.1996. The same pattern was adopted by UT Administration, Chandigarh. At the time of implementation of the CWP No. 18302 of 2008 2 new pay scale, the petitioners were placed in pay scale of Rs.4400-7000 w.e.f. 1.1.1996. Under Rule 7 of the Punjab Civil Services (Revised Pay) Rules, 1998, where the pay of a government servant was more than the basic pay in the revised pay scale, the employee is entitled to continue to draw increments on the date already fixed for such increment. However, under proviso to Rule 7, where an employee is placed in a higher pay scale than existing pay scale, then date of his increment will be shifted from 12 months after the date of release of the revised pay scale. On that basis, the date of increments of the petitioners was shifted from 1.1.1997 and 22.5.1997, respectively vide orders dated 12.9.08 (Annexures P-8 and P-9, respectively). These orders are subject matter of challenge in the present writ petition. The only contention raised by the petitioners is that under Rule 7, the petitioners are entitled to receive increments on the dates as if there is no change in their pay scales. Rule 7 relied upon by the petitioners reads as under:- “7.Fixation of pay in the revised scale:-The pay of a government employee who opts or is deemed to have opted for the revised scale in terms of the provisions or these rules shall unless in any case the government by special order otherwise directs, be fixed in the following manner, namely:- (i)an amount representing forty percent of the basic pay in the existing scale shall be added to the “existing emoluments” of the employee, and (ii)after the existing emoluments have been so increased, the pay shall thereafter, be fixed in the revised at the stage next above the amount of the existing emoluments so computed, if it falls between two stages. Provided that:- CWP No. 18302 of 2008 3 (a)If the minimum of the revised scale is more than the amount so arrived at the pay shall be fixed at the minimum of the revised scale; (b)If the amount so arrived at is higher than the maximum of the revised scale, the amount in excess of the maximum of the revised scale shall be treated as personal pay which shall be absorbed in future increments and shall be reckoned as pay for all purposes; Provided further that where in the fixation of pay, the pay of Government employees drawing pay at the more than three consecutive stages in an existing scale gets bunched, that is to say, gets fixed in the revised scale at the same stage, the pay in the revised scale of such of those employees who are drawing pay beyond the first three consecutive stages in the existing scale shall be stepped up by the grant of increment(s) in the revised scale in the following manner, namely:- (a)for the Government employees drawing pay from the fourth upto the sixth stage of in the existing scale by one increment (b)for the government employees drawing pay from the seventh upto the ninth stage in the existing scale, if there is bunching beyond the sixth stage. by two increments (c ) for the Government employees drawing pay from the tenth upto the twelfth stage in the existing scale, if there is bunching beyond the ninth stage; by three increments (d) for the Government employees drawing pay from the thirteenth upto the fifteenth stage in the existing scale, if there is bunching CWP No. 18302 of 2008 4 beyond the twelfth stage. by four increments If by stepping up the pay as above, the pay of a government employee gets fixed up at a stage in the revised scale which is higher than the stage at which the pay of a government employee who was drawing more pay in the same existing scale is fixed, the pay of the latter shall also be stepped up to the level at par with the former. Provided further that the fixation thus made shall ensure that every employee shall get at least one increment in the revised scale for every three increments (inclusive of exgratia increment(s), if any) in the existing scale of pay; Note:See illustrations 1 to 7 appended to these rules for guidance:- Provided further that in the case of an employee who is in receipt of special pay or special allowance attached to a post in addition to pay in the existing scale which has been revised without special pay or special allowance, as the case may be, such a government employee shall draw special pay or special allowance at the existing rate of amount as a measure personal to him so long as he hold that posts. Provided further that in case of an employee who is in receipt of special pay/special allowance or non-practicing allowance (NPA) in addition to pay in the existing scale which has been revised with special pay or special allowance or non-practicing allowance (by whatever name it may be called) at the same rate or at a different rate, such a Government employee shall draw a special pay, special allowance or non-practicing allowance at the rate allowed with the revised scale. CWP No. 18302 of 2008 5 Note 1- Where the increment of a Government employee falls on the first day of January, 1996, he shall have option to draw the increment in this existing scale or the revised scale of pay. Note 2- Where a government employee is on leave on the 1st day of January, 1996, he shall become entitled to pay in the revised scale of pay from the date he joins duty. In case of government employee under suspension, he shall continue to draw substance allowance based on existing scale and his pay in the revised scale will be subject to final order on the pending disciplinary proceedings. The respondents rely upon Rule 8. Relevant extract of the said Rule is as under:- “8.Date of next increment:- (1)The next increment of a Government employee, whose pay has been fixed in the revised scale in accordance with rule 7, shall be granted to the date he would have drawn his increment, had he continued in the existing scale. Provided that in case where the pay of Government employee is stepped up in terms of the provisions of second proviso to rule 7, the next increment shall be granted on the completion of qualifying service of twelve months from the date of the stepping up the pay in the revised scale. Provided further that in case other than those covered by the preceding proviso, the next increment of a government employee, whose pay is CWP No. 18302 of 2008 6 fixed on the first day of January, 1996 at the same stage as the one fixed for another government employee who junior to him in the same cadre and drawing pay at a lower stage than his in the existing scale, shall be granted on the same date as admissible to his junior, if the date of increment of the junior happens to be earlier.” From the perusal of the aforesaid rule, it is evident that the petitioners' pay is required to be fixed under Proviso to Rule 8 as the basic pay under the revised pay of the petitioners is more than the basic pay scale which they were receiving before the revision of the pay scale. In view of the clear rule position, the impugned orders cannot be faulted with. Mr. Gupta, learned counsel for respondents states that the respondents have no intention to effect any recovery, except to re-fix the pay in accordance with Rule 8. In this view of the matter, this petition is dismissed, in so far as the challenge to impugned orders (Annexures P-8 and P-9) is concerned. However, it is made clear that no recovery shall be effected from the petitioners on account of shifting of date of increments. (PERMOD KOHLI) JUDGE 28.9. 2010 MFK