IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. C.W.P.(T) No. : 4787 of 2008. Decided on: 28th July, 2010. _________________________________________________________ Parkash Chand. …Petitioner. -Versus- State of H.P. and others. …Respondents. Coram: The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajiv Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 Yes. __________________________________________________________ For the petitioner. : Mr. Onkar Jairath, Advocate. For the respondents. : Mr. R.P. Singh, Assistant Advocate General. ____________________________________________________________ Rajiv Sharma, Judge(Oral): The case of the petitioner, in a nut-shell, is that he is an Ex-serviceman. He was appointed as Constable, however, taking into consideration the fact that he has served in the Indian Army as Nursing Assistant, he was posted as Nursing Assistant vide office order dated 9th August, 1994 (Annexure A- 5). However, the petitioner has not been paid the salary of the higher post of Nursing Assistant. Mr. Onkar Jairath, learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon Selva Raj versus Lt. Governor of Island, Port Blair and others, AIR 1999 Supreme Court 838. Their Lordships have held as under: “3. It is not in dispute that the appellant looked after the duties of Secretary (Scouts) from the date of the order and his salary was to be drawn against the post of secretary (Scouts) under GFR. Still he was not paid the said salary for the work done by 1 Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes. him as Secretary (Scouts). It is of course true that the appellant was not regularly promoted to the said post. It is also true as stated in the counter affidavit of Deputy Resident Commissioner, Andaman & Nicobar Administration that the appellant was regularly posted in the pay scale of 1200-2040 and he was asked to look after the duties of Secretary (Scouts) as per the order aforesaid. It is also true that had this arrangement not been done, he would have to be transferred to the interior islands where the post of PST was available, but the appellant was keen to stay in Port Blair as averred in the said counter. However in our view, these averments in the counter will not change the real position. Fact remains that the appellant has worked on the higher post though temporarily and in an officiating capacity pursuant to the aforesaid order and his salary was to be drawn during that time against the post of Secretary (Scouts). It is also not in dispute that the salary attached to the post of Secretary (Scouts) was in the pay scale of 1640-2900. Consequently, on the principle of quantum merit the respondents authorities should have paid the appellant as per the emoluments available in the aforesaid higher pay scale during the time he actually worked on the said post of Secretary (Scouts) though in an officiating capacity and not as a regular promotee. This limited relief is required to be given to the appellant on this ground.” 2. The respondents were directed to take a decision vide order dated 24.6.2010, however, no decision has been taken by the respondents till date. 3. Since admittedly the petitioner has worked against the higher post of Nursing Assistant, he is entitled to the salary for the period he has actually worked as a Nursing Assistant. 4. Accordingly, the petition is allowed. The respondents are directed to pay the salary of the post of Nursing Assistant to the petitioner for the period he has worked in this capacity, within a period of three weeks from today. He shall also be entitled to interest @6% per annum. No costs. (Rajiv Sharma) Judge July 28, 2010. (bhupender)