1 90 1 ew 2 4 46 p v V o4 s4 019 1 1 n4 e1 cr CWP No14394 of2010 019 Date ofdecisionl 11052011 1 CWP No 14394of2010 MajorSinghKhatkarand othersVs StateofPunjab and others 21CWP NoA1880f2011 r m SinghDhiIlonandothersVs StateofPunjab andothers r 0 31CWPN0127480f2010 C Sodagar SahahGuptaand othersVs StateofPunjab and others 0 41 CWP No19490of2010 SmtSantosh GuptaandothersVs StateofPunjab and another Z 51CWPNo 179610f2010 ChamanLal Sethi and othersVs StateofPunjab and another I 61 CWP Nol8486 of2010 L2 1 Z Amar Natl3hutaniand othersvs StateofPunjab and others 7 CWP No8846 of2010 1 r 7 ChanderKanta and others 2 2 Vs StateofPunjab and another 1 Om A81CWP Nol9964of2010 t Kidar NathShannaand others Vs StateofPunjab and another k93CWP No9969 0f2010 Ajit Singhand others Vs StateofPunjaband another 101 CWP No2457of2011 Sat Pal Vs The StateofPunjab and others 610CWPN0 46470f2011 1 Ajit Singhand others Vs StateofPunjaband another Anita 2014.05.26 15: 15 True Scanned Copy Of The Original PHHC,Chandigarh Sahil Soni 2016.03.21 12:27 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 91 V VllIVn1A1 nvrnenl 6100 J CWP Nol4394 of2010 29 f121CWP No 4166 of2011 GurcharanSinghBedi Vs StateofPunjaband others 1431CWP NoA123 of2011 GurcharanSinghand others Vs StateofPunjaband another 141 CWP No 2975 of2011 RameshKumari Vs StateofPunjab andanother m 151 CWP No 2886of2011 D MangalSinghand others Vs Stateof Punjab and another 0 CO 161 CWP NoA305 of2011 1 t5 SinghVs StateofPunjab and Others I Z CORAlv HONBLE MR JUSTICE PERMOD KOHLI 0 Present Mr RK Arora MrYM MrSameer SachdevaMs 1 Alka ChatrathMrVikas ChatrathMrik SinghMr KPS Sandhu MrTribhawanSinglaMrGS Bal Mr Harinder Lo Z na AlrSK Arora Mrnil Chopra Singlaand MrDeepakGuptaAdvocatesfor tloetitioners Qo MrPuneet Gt4otaAddl AdvocateGeneralPunjabwith C MsCharu Tuli SeniorDAG Punjabfor therespondents 2 Z PERMOD KOHLI J in all thesewrit petitionsis common based upon identicalfactsand same questionoflaw The petitioners are claimingbenefit of the revised pay scales 4 with effect rom 19061971 the date when the similarly situated govemment were held entitled to the revised pay scales on completionof Sve years of service These petitionerswere denied benefit r 91W0Wmrnwtamvw a Anita 2014.05.26 15: 15 True Scanned Copy Of The Original PHHC,Chandigarh Sahil Soni 2016.03.21 12:27 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 92 1Ih 4 916vIA4IHIVe l t m vr nelMeV4V4061911Orv r7 A CWP Nol4394 of2010 31 thoughlater all of them were egrantedthe benefit with effect from 1071975 This controversyearlier came up before this CourtinCWP No2208 of 1989 0LekhRaj Khera and others Vs State of Punjab and anotherl This writ petitionwas allowed vide judgmentdated 24032009 with directionslm In view of the abovelegaland factualposition 1 this petitionsucceedspartially r are directedto extendthebenefltofthe Payrevision in 0 tA0 case of petitionerswef 111971 instead of I C 1671975 Theyare Slrtherdirectedto flx thepay I scale of the such of the petitionerswhose Z unrevised pay falls betweentwo stagesin the new r time scale 111the revised scale in the next stage I Theprocessoffixation ofpaybe within r Z a periodof four months from the date certified Qo copy of this orderis served upon the competent The consequential benefitbereleasedin 3 Z favour of the petitioners within a periodof two Qw monthsthereatler 2432009 0PERMODKOHLI JUDG 1 It is common case of the partiesthat all the petitioners e are govemed by the directionscontained in Lekh Raj Kheras case supra noticed hereinaboveHowever leamedcounsel appearingfor the State respondentshas expressedreservationin regardto grant of relief to these wnt petitionersparticularlythOSewho approachedthe Court after a long 241mmeuwaomea 4 Anita 2014.05.26 15: 15 True Scanned Copy Of The Original PHHC,Chandigarh Sahil Soni 2016.03.21 12:27 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 4 93 9 lab116SPee46wo 454 lr rv vrewakSa 1errrC96e t e CWP Nol4394 of2010 49 delayfor seekingthe relief As a matter of fact all the petitioners are seeking of thejudgment of Lekh Raj Kheras case for their respective benefits In view ofthe objection raised bythe Statespondents on thequestion of delaythesewrit petitions were heardthough all the writ petitionsare covered by the judgment rendered in Lekh Raj Kherascase tr The Statehasrelied upon VMlOUS which are noticed hereunder 0 Co In the case of RegionalManagerAePe SRTC Vse N C5 and others 20089 1 Supreme Court Cases 210 Honble I the Supreme Court declinedthe prayer for regularisation of daily wagers Z from the date of their initial engagementin the year 1986 111the writ 2 petitionfiled in the jlear1999 On the groundof delayand laches though I t Z In the case of Nadia DisttePrimarySchool Council and Q0 another Vs Sristidhar Biswas and others 2007912 Supreme Court C W2 Cases779 Z tlledafler a periodof nineyears The relevantobservations are contaiInedin paragraph11 of thejudgment afotesaidwhichare asunder 1 11 In the presentcase the Panelwas prepared in 1980 and the petitionersapproachedthe court in 1989 atler the decision in Dibakar Pal Such persons ShOuldnot be given any benefit by the COUrt when theyallowed more than nine years to Anita 2014.05.26 15: 15 True Scanned Copy Of The Original PHHC,Chandigarh Sahil Soni 2016.03.21 12:27 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 94 n r 91 er N11104r1499n1 96 9 Il Ill 41 4O e619tr60rh 9 nlInmMlh11 e9 4 CWP No4394 of2010 659 elapse Delay is very significantin matters of granting reliefand court cannot come to therescue of the persons who are not vigilant Therefore the Vlew taken by the High Court condoningthe delayof nine years cannot be countenancedl 1 In Eastern CoalfieldsLimited Vs DugalKumar 2008 14 r Supreme Court Cases 295 aewritpetitionwas flled a8er a decadeclaiming 0 0 the benefit of additionalquantity of coal allotted to the company 10 years I 0 beforethe date of filingof the writ petitionIt hasbeen held that inordinate I delayothe part of the petitionerin makingthe motion for a writ is an Z groundfor re8ising to exercise discretion under Article 226 of L the ConstitutionofIndia I In the case of SS Balu and another vse State of Kerala and Z others 2 Supreme Court Cases 479 Honble the Supreme Court made followingobservationsto denythe relief when there is inordinate C delayl 7 Z U 17 It is also wellsettled principleof law that Ll delay defeatsequity The Govent order was issued on 1512002 The appellantsdid not Ole 1 any writ application the legalityand 44 validitythereof Onlyafler the writ petitions filed by others were allowed and the State of Kerala preferredan appeal they impleaded themselvesas It is now a trite mmleaewmmkxwwpswan6urawbw Anita 2014.05.26 15: 15 True Scanned Copy Of The Original PHHC,Chandigarh Sahil Soni 2016.03.21 12:27 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 1 95 e U400 n440n v em 1 1s1r19 n e klr eliv41IOmt V1 Iel 4 i CWP Nol4394 of2010 0 law that where the writ petitionerapproaches the High Court af2er a longdelayreliefs prayedfor may be denied to them on thegroundof delayand laches irrepectiveof the fact theyare similarly situated to the other candidateswho obtain the benefitofthe It is thus not possible for 1 US to issue any direction to the Stateof Kerala or the Commission to appointthe at this 0 C stage In NDMC v Pan Singhthis Court held I C5 SCC p83 para169 I In the case of Shiv Dass Vse Union of India nd others Z 200719 Supreme Court cases 274 the writ petitionerwas denied the disabilitypensionin the year 1983 He 81eda writ petition r 111the High I Court in the year 2005 This writ petitionwas dismissedbytheHighCourt Cl the questionof delayandlacheseThe Honble Supreme Z Court while the matter to the High Court rnade the following fJ observations 7 Z 10 In the case of pensionthe cause of action actuallycontinues from month to month That 1 1 1 however cannot be a groundto overlook delaylll 1 filingthe petition It would dependuponthe fact m of each case If petition 1S filed beyond a reasonable period say three years normallythe Court would rejectthe same or restrict the relief which coUld be grantedto a reasonableperiodof Anita 2014.05.26 15: 15 True Scanned Copy Of The Original PHHC,Chandigarh Sahil Soni 2016.03.21 12:27 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 96 no 1 0 1 84 4eMe 9ke1110 012 1 6 Ie4 4 A nnc noeeIa o 1n1vov 0 09 0 V4 1 r CWP No4394 of2010 79 aboutthreeyears The HighCourt did not examine whether on merit the appellanthad a case If on rneritsit would have for interferenceit would have dismissedthe writ petitionon that score alone Learned counsel appeanngfOr the have also 1 referredto vanous of this Court and also the government 1 0 HighCourt C43 The StateofPunjab issuedinstructions dated170072002 to all theFinancial I C5 thePrincipal Secretariesand theAdministrative Secretaries I to the GovernmentofPunjabThe instructions are as under et Z 0 Wherevertherightsof the partieshave been 2 C settled by a judgment of the Court the Statehas I 1 Z judgment even upto the highestcourt of the land and the has attained flnalitythen the m Z its true spiritand command There 1S implicit 1 obligation on the part of the Stateto grant same relief to other membersof the cadre whoseclaim 1000 ii The StateGovernment shall as as possiblein any case not laterthan four months react and respondto a legal servedupon it byany of its employees in redressal 11 1 WASSU44Im 2 2 131 v Anita 2014.05.26 15: 15 True Scanned Copy Of The Original PHHC,Chandigarh Sahil Soni 2016.03.21 12:27 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 97 0100 r WIlV4 en me e e 0 n 04n IIo4 4 Ve 11OlL 40O CWP N014394 of2010 8 of his of relief which has been grantedto his similarlysituated lll to thejudgment ofthe Court Unless for reasons to be indicatedin the reply the State feelscompelled to denysuch relief Needlessto point out that denial must neitherbe evasive nor 1 intended to circunt theorders ofthe Court iio In the event such an employee is compelled 0 C0 to approachthe COUrt of law the court 0 awardsinterestandlor costs while allowing sucha I petitionthen theexpenditure incurredbythe State Z including the costslinterestpaid 111 furtherance to 2 the orders ofthe Court should be recovered from theerringofficers9 L0 iv The concemedquartersofthe Government are Z expectedto work out the detailsin 61rtherance OO to the above directions meo and issue pervasivebut Z ll to ensure compliance 1 In the case of State of karnataka OrSe VSe Ce Lalitha 440000 2 SCC ofsirnilarly situatedpetsons obsen7ed as under 18 Service evolved by this Court from time to time postulatesthat all persons em wXmee Anita 2014.05.26 15: 15 True Scanned Copy Of The Original PHHC,Chandigarh Sahil Soni 2016.03.21 12:27 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 98 nl 5 WlV 44Wdlt4 elsMee4 e 4 vn On I n4 S rlnelll e O I r S rlp Il 4 rnl bwne 6 tn or vz rey i eer OSI v5541 1 4 14 191 AJ C CWP No14394 of2010 9 similarlysituatedshouldbetreatedsimilarlyOnly becauseone person has approached the court that would not mean that persons similarlysituated shouldbe treated 21 The petitioners are similarly situatedas the writ petitioners 111 Lekh Raj Kheras case However it is faCt that these writ a petitionershaveapproached this Court aRer the judgmentof Lekh Raj 0 Kherascase for thesimilarrelief The Statewhile that they I are C9 similarlysituatedresistedtheirclaim onlyon the groundof delayin filing 1 the writ petitions The judgment in Lekh Raj Kheras case has attained Z finalityand the State has 54 th Same vide its circular dated r 18082010issuedbythe DistrictEducationOfficer OSE9 to all the Masters etc The relevant instructionsfor its r are as under1 Z OO As per letterunderreference directions were mm issued to draw the arrears of the concemed with Z regard to grantofpayscalefrom 1111971instead 11 of 16771975in terms of thereportof the Kothari 4 of by the Court 111terms of the decisionin Lekh RajKheras case Therefore if any petitionerof this writ petitionis pertaining tOYour schoothe due benefitbe given to him within 10 days and In44 a6 4W 41 14v Anita 2014.05.26 15: 15 True Scanned Copy Of The Original PHHC,Chandigarh Sahil Soni 2016.03.21 12:27 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 99 eee9w Poa Ie IVUlll eee l1ve 47e46 WI1401641 0VdpIee 0 4 141eI4 mWo4Ie5 CWP No4394 of2010 10 receipt be sent to this offlce While paymentto the petitionerthe Head of the School will ensure that the benefit has been correctly glven to the petitioneras per instructionslrulesIf due to the of the school Head any petitionerremained for payment the m C concerned SchoolHead will be responsiblefor the 5 O same C0 From the above circular it is establishedthat the State has 9 implemented the judgment qua writ petitionersin Lekh Raj Kheras case r Instructionsdated depictsGovernments Z policyto implement the attainingfinalitynot only quathe writ petitioners but also in respect to all non as Well who are Theseinstructions L Z are generalin nature and applyin all such cases Whereverthe judgment 4 against the State has attainedtlnalityDespite oo theseinstructions having been issuedin the a7 year2002 the State 1S actingin thereofand Z similarly situatedpersonsare left with no otheroption Qu but to approachthis Court time and again This has the effect of this Court with untecessary litigation and thejusticedelivery system It may also to implement the c Udment in respect to all similarly situated persons a Division Bench of this Court also SSUed generaldirecuon 111this regardln the case of satbir SinghVse State of Haryana2002 29Service CasesToday354 The r61evantdirectionsare contained in paragraph19 of this judgmentwhich Anita 2014.05.26 15: 15 True Scanned Copy Of The Original PHHC,Chandigarh Sahil Soni 2016.03.21 12:27 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 400 V 444mm e 6 4 1 0 14Al 6e v 1 105ea 40OI n49 r 4 aev CWP Nol4394 of 2010 0119 C are as under 19 Be that as it may particularly111 the aforee referred premiseswe still feel that it is the boundendutyof the Court to issue the folIowing directionsto the Statein the largerpublicinterest and for properadministrationofjusticel m 6i9Whereverthe rightsof the partieshave been C 0 settledbya judgment of the Court the Statehas 0 taken all remediesavailable to it in law againstthat I t49 even uptothe highestcourt of the land I and the has attained flnalitythen the Z State must acceptthejudgment and implement it in its true spiritand command There is implicit I obligation on the part of the Stateto grant same r rlif tO Othermembersof the cadre whose claim n r10 was basedupon identicalfactsandpointoflaw i 2 ii The StateGovernmentshall as 1 1 as possiblein any case not laterthanfour months react and respondto a legal served upon it byany of its employees in redressal of his of relief which has been elee grantedto his similarlysituated 111 to thejudgmentofthe Court Unless 1 fOr reasons to be indicated111the reply the State feels compelledto denysuch relief Needless to mwezwmrm0n401wwmmIore IoI 1 Anita 2014.05.26 15: 15 True Scanned Copy Of The Original PHHC,Chandigarh Sahil Soni 2016.03.21 12:27 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 401 v 11e149P41OlI tOVse V vAa4AI 1 2 CWP Nol4394 of2010 129 point out that denial must neither be evasive nor intended to circumventthe ordersofthe Court Olil In the event such an employee is compelled to approachthe court of law whereupon the court awardsinterestandlor costs while allowing such a petitionthenthe incurredbytheState m including the costslinterestpaid r 111 furtherance to the ordersofthe Court shouldbe recovered 0 from 0 theerring officerS I 0 6iv9The concemedquartersofthe Government are I expected to work out the detailsin Slrtherance to Z the above directions and issue pervasive but to ensure Il C It is a matter of Z concem that the abovedirectionsissuedby this Courtas far back as the year 2002are beingflouted lll OO With The State has failed to its mm to grant relief to similarly situatedpersons at its OWIl Ievel Under such circumstances it cannot be i i1 permittedto pleaddelayand lacheswhere the Stateitself i1S responsible for leVel On account of HOble Supreme Court Apart from e above it has also come on record that afler Lekh Raj Kheras case a number of writ petitionscameto be filed in the year 2009and 2010 which have beendecidedby this Court grantingthe 2 mObrrWW6Wkw ZIIIVrmoIxawAv 41444 Anita 2014.05.26 15: 15 True Scanned Copy Of The Original PHHC,Chandigarh Sahil Soni 2016.03.21 12:27 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 402 u 5 9 ee 1 e 1144 1 Ilv W Vll 4 m1 aee vVaW44 nl l I Veve v 1 01 I4 I 291 h161v4Aeav A r CWP Nol4394 of2010 13 similar relief as 111Lekh RajKheras case and the Statehas chosen not to preferany appealagainstthose The questionof relxation of the salar 111 fact givesa recurring cause of action to the govemmentemployee as every month he loosessome amount fromhis salaryOrretiral benefitson account of wrong fixation of salary Thus the doctrineof delayand laches cannot be m permitted to be invokedas thumbrule Ct ln every case The cited 0 C3 policymatters In C Lalithas case supra9Honble the Supreme Court 9 has clearlyheld that similarlysituatedpersons should not be treated I Similarly lll Shiv Dasss case supra9Cited on behalfof the Z Honble the Supreme Court has againclearlyheld that in 2 tr I A Full Benchof thisCourt lll the case of SarojKumari and C Z others vse The state of Punjaband others 1998 059ServicesLaw Reporter266 have examinedthe questionof relxation in the 00 context of aw Z 9 Learnedcounsel for the petitionersubmitted 0 n l thatin case of wrongfixationof pay to which an employeemay be entitled under the relevant rules instructions or even on account of a judgment 1 thereis no questionof any limitationas the wrong payment of salaryevery month is a cntinuing wrong againsthim which givesnse to recurring cause ofaction each time he is paid salarywhich is 4Il1 Anita 2014.05.26 15: 15 True Scanned Copy Of The Original PHHC,Chandigarh Sahil Soni 2016.03.21 12:27 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 1 403 6 9 v 44 Sn i Ie WU M6md nlau mk v r eU vnm Ai 1 CWP No43940f2010 149 r not computedaccordingto the relevant rules instructionsor ajudgmentthe employees in such a case has a rightto ask for a directionto the State Goveent or to the employer to fix the pay correctlyrightfromdayone in accordancewith the relevantrules and instructionsHowever while 1 the relief of arrears of pay etc the r same can be confined to three 0 yearsand two months C0 which is the periodof limitation providedfor I C5 getting a relief of realisationof arrears in a civil suit Z 14 For the reasons we are of the view that in cases where onlxation of pay according I to the relevant or a 1S L0 Z prayedfor thewrit petitioncannot bedismissed at 0 delayand lachesbut the payment of arrears be restricted a can to a Z reasonable period Three yearsand two months would be considereda reasonableperiodas that is 1 the period for which a person can ask for the 1 c paymentofarmlrs before a Civil Court cause Thus the ratio of thejudgmentof the Full Bench 1S applicableon aIl four corners to the factsof this case on account of delayand lachesthough the lief for arrears Catl be restrictedto a period WM9 Anita 2014.05.26 15: 15 True Scanned Copy Of The Original PHHC,Chandigarh Sahil Soni 2016.03.21 12:27 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 404 6 r 908654644w24241 b Pew4 e s A4 e A4m4 4 A 461 ee 081 7 1e CWP Nol4394 of2010 0159 r ofthreeyears as observedby Honble the Supreme Court and Full Bench of this Court referredto hereinabove In view of theabove thesepetitionsare allowed Ul tmS Of thejudgmentin Lekh Raj Kherascase However theclaim for arrears 1S restrictedto threeyearspreceding the Olingof the writ petitions No costse 1 It is 8lrther directedthat all similarlysituatedgovemment Q may be grantedthe relief in tenns of Lekh Raj Kheras case 0 0 though claim of arrears to threeyears It would be prudentand I 0 appropriatefor the Gvemment to issue a in this I Z A copy of this orderbe placed the file of otherconnected on 2 writ petitions C I C Oo t 11052Oll Z BLS PERMOD KOHLI9 JUDGE m 1 1r e 1 Note Whetherto bereferredto theReporter2 YES 12 Il r i C1 t 5 C l d e 1 7Wn4we vunu Anita 2014.05.26 15: 15 True Scanned Copy Of The Original PHHC,Chandigarh Sahil Soni 2016.03.21 12:27 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document