CWP No.11386 of 2001 [1] IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. C. W. P. No. 11386 of 2001 Date of Decision: 30 - 8 - 2010 Mohinder Singh ....Petitioner v. State of Haryana and others ....Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA *** Present: Mr.Rajinder Goyal, Advocate and Mr.R.K.Bansal, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr.Himanshu Raj, AAG, Haryana for the respondents. *** KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA, J. (ORAL) In the present writ petition, the following prayers have been made:- “a) issue a writ in the nature of certiorari thereby quashing the order dated 28/29.6.2000 i.e. Annexure P-4 and the impugned action of the respondents by which the pay of petitioner has been reduced, solely on the ground that the petitioner is appointed to Class-III post by way of promotion, and recovery has been ordered to be effected from the petitioner in violation of principles of natural justice i.e. Without affording opportunity of hearing; b) issue a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to grant the same pay scale to the petitioner which is being granted to the Direct Recruits (Juniors); c) further issue a writ in the nature of prohibition CWP No.11386 of 2001 [2] restraining the respondents from effecting recovery from the salary of petitioner or otherwise; Regarding the prayers made by the petitioner, the matter stands concluded by the ratio of law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Commissioner and Secretary to Govt. of Haryana and others v. Ram Sarup Ganda and others, 2007(2) SCT 476 and in paras 8 and 9, it was held as under:- “8. Rule 9 quoted above only says that the senior Government servants, who are direct recruits, are not entitled to get any stepping up in case any anomaly arises regarding the receipt of lesser pay by them. However, the same is not applicable to the respondents herein who joined the service as Group "D" employees and later got promotion to Group "C" post by selection. If there is any anomaly to the effect that the senior Government servants are receiving lesser pay than their juniors, who entered the service from a different source of recruitment, certainly such senior Government servants are entitled to stepping up of their pay in order to bring them on par with the salary which is being received by their juniors. There is no clause in the scheme which prohibits such stepping up of salary which is a common practice applicable to all Government employees in case there is anomaly in the pay structure of the employees. By the impugned judgment, the High Court has held that the respondents are entitled to get the ACP scales that are applicable to Group "C" post, but the Rules, as such, do not provide for that. The Rules say, that if there are already two upgradations, then the concerned employees are not entitled to the benefit of ACP scales. Nevertheless, if ACP scales are higher, they are certainly entitled to the ACP scales at the starting point. The date of giving such ACP scales is the date of entry into the service and though these respondents are entitled to get ACP scales and get fixation of the ACP scales as applicable to Group "D" CWP No.11386 of 2001 [3] employees and in case there are anomalies to the effect that they receive lesser pay than their juniors working in the same cadre/post, such senior Government servants are entitled to step up of their salary to get it on par with the salary which is being received by their juniors. In the result, all the appeals are partly allowed. The appellants shall revise the pay scales of the respondents. In case of any anomaly, if the employees who, on fixation of ACP scales, are in receipt of lesser salary than their juniors in the same cadre/post, then their salary shall be stepped up accordingly. Revised orders shall be passed within a period of two months of the receipt of the copy of this order by the Government. 9. However, if upon revision of the pay-scales, any employee is liable to refund any amount, the Government shall not insist on refund of such amount. If any employee is entitled to get any amount by way of pay revision, the said amount shall be made available to him within a period of six months from the date of receipt of the copy of this order by the Government.” Case of the petitioner is not different from the employees in whose favour Hon'ble Apex Court had pronounced the above said judgment. Hence, the respondents are directed to consider and decide the case of the petitioner in view of the directions given by the Hon'ble Apex Court in paras 8 and 9 of the aforesaid judgment, within two months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. With the aforesaid observations, the writ petition is disposed of. ( KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA ) August 30, 2010. JUDGE RC