C.R. No. 6971 of 2010 (O&M) [ 1 ] IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH C.R. No. 6971 of 2010 (O&M) Date of Decision: December 8,2011 Haryana Power Generation Corporation Limited and others ....................................... Petitioners Versus Daulat Ram and others ............................... Respondents Coram: Hon'ble Ms. Justice Ritu Bahri 1.To be referred to the Reporters or not? 2. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? Present: Mr. Gaurav Mohunta, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. Rajesh Arora, Advocate for respondent Nos. 1 to 4, 8, 9, 11, 14 and 20. .. RITU BAHRI, J. The petitioner-Haryana Power Generation Corporation Limited is aggrieved by the order dated 8.9.2010 passed by the Additional Civil Judge (Sr. Divn.), Faridabad whereby the application under Section 151 CPC for taking cognizance of the judgment dated 6.5.2009 of the Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No. 3306 of 2009 (Haryana Vidyut Parsaran Nigam Limited & Another v. Gulshan Lal & C.R. No. 6971 of 2010 (O&M) [ 2 ] Others) has been dismissed. Vide judgment and decree dated 29.10.2001 passed in Civil Suit No. 176 of 1999 the suit of the respondents-plaintiffs was decreed in which the plaintiffs were held entitled to the pay scale of `1400-2600/- and `1600-2660/- from the date of promotion/re-designation as Technician Grade-II. It was also observed that the decree shall be subject to the decision in R.S.A. No. 800 of 1992 titled as “Haryana State Electricity Board v. Anil Kapoor and others”. The plaintiffs were not entitled to get arrears of enhanced pay scale till the decision of the said R.S.A. In the execution application the Judgment Debtors have taken the objections against the trial court decree dated 29.10.2001. The Decree Holders had filed C.W.P. No. 14703 of 2003 claiming parity on the basis of judgment rendered in R.S.A. No. 800 of 1992 titled “Haryana State Electricity Board v. Anil Kapoor and others”. This writ petition was allowed on 24.4.2006 and the payment of arrears was restricted to three years and two months. This judgment was challenged in the Supreme Court by filing SLP. The Supreme Court set aside the order dated 24.4.2006 of the High Court vide its judgment dated 6.5.2009. The Supreme Court in paragraph 22 observed as under:- “We are not oblivious of the fact that the respondents legally would not have been entitled C.R. No. 6971 of 2010 (O&M) [ 3 ] to the reliefs prayed for by them. However, as a decree has been passed, we do not intend to go behind the same. The Executing Court shall, it goes without saying, execute the decree strictly in terms thereof.” In view of the observation of the Supreme Court the Judgment Debtors sought that the execution petition be dismissed. On an earlier occasion the objections filed by the Judgment Debtors were dismissed by the Executing Court vide order dated 28.11.2009. After considering the judgment passed by the Supreme Court on 6.5.2009 the judgment dated 29.10.2001 has attained finality as the appeals preferred by the Judgment Debtors have been dismissed by the Hon'ble High Court and Hon'ble Supreme Court. Mr. Gaurav Mohunta, learned counsel for the petitioner, has argued that Civil Revision No. 6031 of 2009 was disposed of by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court against which the State has gone in SLP. The Supreme Court has passed the orders as follows:- “Issue notice on the question as to whether the respondents have been given any benefit over and above that which has been allowed by the Civil Court (Junior Division), Faridabad, vide its Original Decrees dated 17th November, 2000 in Civil Suit No. 180/1999, 14th August, 2001 in Civil Suit No. C.R. No. 6971 of 2010 (O&M) [ 4 ] 181/1999, 17th November 2000 in Civil Suit No. 150/1999 and 5th October, 2000 in case No. 88/89, as affirmed by this Court.” He has also made reference to two Supreme Court orders (Annexure P7 and P9). However, after going through the order Annexure P9 passed in Civil Appeal No. 3306 of 2009 titled as “Haryana Vidyut Parsaran Nigam Limited & Another v. Gulshan Lal & Others”. It transpires that the Supreme Court has held that once a civil court decree has attained finality, it has to be given effect and the Executing Court cannot go behind it. It has further been held that the objections against the execution of a Civil Court decree would be maintainable only in the event if the decree is shown to be a nullity. In the facts of the present case the Civil Court decree dated 29.10.2001 passed in Civil Suit No. 176 of 1999 whereby a direction has been given that the respondents were entitled to the pay scale of `1400-2600/- and `1600-2660/- and they were not to be given arrears till decision in R.S.A. No. 800 of 1992 (Haryana State Electricity Board v. Anil Kapoor and others) has become final. A Co- ordinate Bench of this Court has dismissed C.R. No. 6034 of 2009. For the aforesaid reasons and in view of the judgment rendered in Civil Appeal No. 3306 of 2009 C.R. No. 6971 of 2010 (O&M) [ 5 ] (Haryana Vidyut Parsaran Nigam Limited & Another v. Gulshan Lal & Others) this Civil Revision is dismissed. 8.12.2011 ( RITU BAHRI ) Rupi JUDGE