IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No. 545 of 2004 Date of decision: 04.07.2008 Union of India & Ors. … Petitioners Versus C.R. Sharma & Ors. … Respondents Coram : The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Deepak Gupta, Judge. The Hon’ble Mr. Justice V.K. Ahuja, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 No. For the Petitioners: Mr. Sandeep Sharma, Assistant Solicitor General of India. For the respondents: Mr. T.S. Chauhan, Advocate, for respondents No. 1 & 2. Per Deepak Gupta, J. (Oral): This petition is directed against the order passed by the learned Central Administrative Tribunal in O.A. No. 754-HP-03, decided on 5th April, 2004, whereby it directed the petitioners to grant the scale of Rs.1400-2600 to both the respondents with effect from 7.4.1989 with all consequential benefits. The undisputed facts are that the respondents No. 1 & 2were working as Junior Translators in the office of Chief Post Master General at Shimla. They originally filed O.A. No. 828-HP-2000 claiming that they should be given the scale of Rs.1400-2600 which scale was being paid to the Junior Translators in the Central Secretariat. This petition was disposed of with a direction to the respondents No. 1 & 2 1Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 that they should file a representation to the department in this regard. Accordingly, respondents No. 1 and 2 filed a representation which representation was rejected on the ground that the nature of work and duties of official translators in the Central Secretariat is different and cannot be compared to the nature of duties of the Junior Translators posted in the Department of Post and other departments. Aggrieved against the said decision on this representation, respondents No. 1 and 2 filed O.A. No. 754-HP-2003. This application has been allowed vide the impugned order. The learned Tribunal has allowed this application on two grounds; firstly, that the Junior Stenographers in the Central Public Works Department as well as in the Ministry of Defence, who were working in the field and not in the Secretariat were given this benefit by two orders of the Principal Bench of the Central Administrative Tribunal which orders had been implemented by the concerned Ministry; the second ground which weighed with the learned Tribunal was that even the 5th Central Pay Commission had accepted the fact that all the Junior Translators whether in the Secretariat or in the departments do the same work and recommended uniform scale of Rs.5000-8000/- to all the Junior Translators, regardless of the fact as to whether they were working in the Central Secretariat or in other departments in the field. Aggrieved by the order of the learned Tribunal, the petitioners have filed the present petition. The stand of the Central Government is that the nature and duties of the official translators working in the Secretariat are different and cannot be compared with the nature and duties of the Junior Translators like the respondents who were working in different Departments. With regard to the Junior Translators in the C.P.W.D. and 3 Ministry of Defence, the only explanation is that the departments have complied with the orders of the learned Tribunal. We are unable to accept the contention raised by the Union of India. In case the Union of India felt that the learned Central Administrative Tribunal had not correctly decided the aforesaid two cases, there was nothing which prevented the Union of India from challenging the orders passed in those cases before an appropriate Court. They have voluntarily accepted the orders passed in those two petitions. The essence of the orders was that no discrimination can be made between the Junior Translators working in the Central Secretariat and the Junior Translators working in the departments in the field. Having accepted and complied with the orders passed in those cases, in our opinion, it does not lie in the mouth of Union of India to now urge that in some cases it will obey the orders of the learned Tribunal and in others it will challenge the same. It may also be pointed out that the Union of India in this present writ petition has not even made a single averment to the effect that that the nature of duties of respondents No. 1 and 2 are in any manner different to the nature of duties of Junior Translators employed in the C.P.W.D. or Ministry of Defence. The mere fact that the Recruitment and Promotion Rules are different would not disentitle the respondents from getting benefit of equal pay for equal work as granted by the learned Tribunal. The Central Government being a model employer must treat all its employees equally. If the Central Administrative Tribunal has passed orders granting benefit to the employees in two cases which orders have been obeyed, we see no reason why the orders passed in the third cases should not also have been obeyed. 4 We are in agreement with the reasons and findings recorded by the learned Tribunal which do not call for any interference by this Court. In view of the above discussion, there is no merit in the writ petition, which is accordingly dismissed. In view of the orders passed in the main petition, the interim order dated 21.12.2004 passed in CMP No. 1073 of 2004 and confirmed on 21.9.2005, stands vacated. ( Deepak Gupta ), Judge. ( V.K. Ahuja ), July 04, 2008 Judge (BSS) 5