IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA. CWP(T) No.1985 of 2008 (OA No.890 of 1991) Date of decision: April 7, 2009. Rajinder Upadhaya and others. …. Petitioners. Versus H. P. State Electricity Board …. Respondent Coram: The Hon’ble Mr Justice Surinder Singh, J. Whether approved for reporting ?1 Yes. For the Petitioners: Mr. Jeevesh Sharma, Advocate. For the respondent: Mr. Shashi Shirshoo, Advocate. Surinder Singh,J (oral). The petitioners are the Law Officers in the Himachal Pradesh State Electricity Board. They filed an O.A. No.890 of 1991 under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunal Act, 1985, before the Erstwhile H. P. State Administrative Tribunal, Shimla, for seeking, mainly the following reliefs: i) To grant the initial revised pay scale of Rs.800-1400/- to the petitioners with effect from joining of their duties in the respondent-Board; 1 Whether the reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? Yes. - 2 - ii) To grant corresponding revised pay scale of Rs.2100-3700/- w.e.f. 1.1.1986 onwards; and iii) To grant special pay of Rs.200/- per month to them since the time of their joining the duties in the respondent- Board. The State Administrative Tribunal stands abolished with effect from July, 2008 and as this matter was pending, as such transferred to the High Court along with others and was registered in this Court as CWP(T) 1985 of 2008. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have carefully gone through the record. As a matter of fact, the petitioners were appointed as “Law Officers Grade-II” in the respondent- Board on and with effect from the dates and in the different pay scales shown against each below: Sl.No. Name of the petitioner Date of appointment in the respondent-Board. Scale 1. Sh. Rajinder Upadhaya 25.7.1989 700-1200 2. Sh.Madan Mehta 18.7.1989 700-1200 3. Sh. Ramesh Chauhan 16.12.1989 1640-2925 - 3 - It is significant to note that the respondent-Board had changed the designation of the post of “Law Officers Grade-II” as “Law Officer” vide office Order No.1161 HPSEB (SECTT)/84 dated 5.7.1984, which was one of the feeder cadre to the post of “Law Officer Grade I”. At that time, there was, only “Law Officer Grade-II” named Shri Satish Kumar Sharma, in the respondent-Board, thus he was designated as “Law Officer” in the then existing pay-scale. Vide office order No.95/ HPSEB (SECTT)89 dated 26.8.1989 (Annexure P-2), the Himachal Pradesh State Electricity Board revised the pay scale of Law Officers Grade-II w.e.f. 1.1.1978 as under:- Sl. No. Name of the Post Pre-revised pay scale prior to 1.1.1978 Revised pay scale already allowed w.e.f. 1.1.1978 Further revised pay scale w.e.f. 1.1.1978 1. Law Officer Grade-II Rs.225-500 + Rs.50/- Spl.Pay per month Rs.700-1200 Rs.800-1400 The pay of the officials in the revised pay scale of Rs.800-1400 was ordered to be fixed in accordance - 4 - with Himachal Pradesh State Electricity Board (Revised Scales of Pay) Regulations-1980 and as amended from time to time. Further vide office order No.18 dated 5.3.1991 (Annexure P-6), the Law Officers (previously designated as Law Officer Grade-II), who were in the existing pay scale of Rs.800-1400 were put on the revised pay-scale of Rs.1640-2925/- w.e.f. 1.1.1986, which was further revised to Rs.2000-3500 from the same date. At the time of their appointment the petitioners No.1 and 2 who were the “Law Officers Grade-II” were placed in the pre-revised pay scale of Rs.700-1200 and the petitioner No.3 who was appointed as Law Officer in December, 1989 was granted a different pay-scale of Rs.1640-2925. Admittedly, the post of “Law Officer Grade-II” was re-designated as “Law Officer” vide office order No.1161/ HPSEB (SECTT.)/84 on and with effect from 5.7.1984 and Satish Kumar Sharma was appointed as Law Officer in the existing pay scale as aforesaid and was - 5 - similarly situated. Then it is not understandable, why the petitioners were denied the benefit of the pay scale, from the date of their appointment as Law Officers in accordance with the Office order No.18 HPSEB (SECTT.) 91 dated 5.8.1991 when their nature of duties remained the same. The plea that the petitioner had accepted the pay scales as granted to them at the time of their initial appointment is no ground to deny them the benefit of the revised pay scale. However, the plea of the petitioners that they were entitled for the grant of corresponding pay scale of Rs.2100- 3700 w.e.f. 1.1.1986 should have been given on parity with Circle Scale Superintendent (Non-gazetted) which was also a feeder cadre to the post of Law Officer Grade-I, cannot be accepted as Circle Scale Superintendents have a different line of promotion and they are from the clerical line in their own scale. Further the petitioners were recruited in the year 1989, therefore, they cannot be given the scale w.e.f. - 6 - 1.1.1986, as they were not born in the cadre. Thus, in my considered opinion, the petitioners who were appointed in the year 1989 as the Law Officers and previously designated as Law Officers Grade-II are entitled for the revised pay scale as per office order No.18/HPSEB (SECTT.)/91 dated 15.3.1991 (Annexure P6) on and with effect from their date of their initial appointment. Thereafter their pay is required to be fixed by the respondent as per revised scale from time to time. In so far as the Special pay of the petitioners No.1 and 2 is concerned, initially, they were paid Rs.50/- per month with effect from the date of their joining as Law Officer, whereas it was not paid to petitioner No.3. Subsequently, this special pay was doubled vide office order dated 8.7.1988 (Annexure P-4) w.e.f.1.1.1986 it was further doubled by the respondent- Board, subject to the maximum of Rs.500/- (Annexure R8). Admittedly, this was neither paid nor granted to the - 7 - petitioners, whereas, it was allowed to Satish Kumar Sharma, a similarly situated officer/official. Thus this discrimination is violative to Article 14 and 16 of the Constitution. As the petitioners were appointed in the year 1989 and their nature of duties remained the same as that of Satish Kumar Sharma, therefore, all the petitioners are held entitled for the Special Pay at the rate of Rs.200/- per month, as against Rs.100/- from the date of their initial appointment. For the reasons aforesaid, the petition is allowed the respondent-Board is hereby directed to grant revised pay scale to the petitioners w.e.f. the date of their initial appointment as per office order No.18 HPSEB (SECTT.) /91 dated 5.3.1991 along with the Special pay of Rs.200/- per month, within a period of two month from today, failing which, it shall carry interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date when it fell due. Accordingly, the petition is allowed to the above extent and stands disposed of. April 7, 2009. (Surinder Singh), (Pds) Judge.