CWP(T) No. 6895/2008 31.08.2010 Present: Mr. K. D. Shreedhar, Advocate, for the petitioners. Mr. R. K. Sharma, Sr. Addl. A.G. with Mr. R. M. Bisht, Dy. A.G. for the respondents. Petitioners have prayed for following reliefs:- “i) That the impugned order dated 22.8.2000 (Annexure A-9) issued by respondent No.3 may kindly be quashed and set aside. After issuing the aforesaid direction, the respondent may be directed to continue allowing the applicants to draw the scale of Rs.5000-8100. ii) That the respondents may be directed to produce the entire record pertaining to the case for perusal of this Hon’ble Tribunal.” 2. The facts are not in dispute. Petitioner Sita Ram Thakur was appointed as a Surveyor on daily wage basis sometimes in the year 1990. He was possessed with a diploma in Civil Engineering. He worked as a Road Inspector. Subsequent to his engagement the post of Road Inspector was re- designated as a Work Inspector on which post petitioner was regularized w.e.f. 1.4.1998 in terms of office order dated 2.5.2000 (Annexure A-1). The facts pertaining to the second petitioner, namely Jagat Ram are similar. 3. Office order dated 2.5.2000 evidently makes it clear that petitioners’ appointment on regular basis as Work Inspectors was in the pay scale of Rs.3120-5160. 4. On 20.7.1990 (Annexure A-3), the Govt. of Himachal Pradesh issued a notification whereby the existing pay scales were revised as under:- “Existing Scale Revised Scale WORK CHARGED STAFF UNDER ( B&R) 400-600 950-1800 For certificate holder For certificate holder 570-1080 1500-2700 For diploma holder For diploma holder” 5. On 9.1.1998, the Govt. issued another communication sanctioning the master scale payable w.e.f. 1.1.1996 with a minimum start of Rs.2620/- for all the employees of the State (Annexure A-4). As per this communication the existing pay scale of Rs.1500-2700 was revised to Rs.5000-8100. 6. In the year 1998, the State of Himachal Pradesh notified the Rules known as the “Himachal Pradesh Civil Services (Revised Pay) (First Amendment) Rules, 1998 (for short ‘the Rules’). The same were notified vide Notification dated 1.9.1998 and communicated to all concerned vide Notification dated 14.9.1998 (Annexure R-III-colly). The Rules were to be effective w.e.f. 1.1.1996. In terms of the said Rules, the pay scale of Work Inspectors was revised as under:- “Existing pay scale Revised pay scale Remarks (in Rupees.) (in Rupees) 950-1800 3120-5160 The existing incumb- (for certificate holder) ents in the scale of 1500-2700 Rs.1500-2700 are (for diploma holder) allowed the revised equivalent of Rs.5000- 8100, as a measure personal to them.” 7. On the question of revision of pay scale, clarification was also issued by the Registrar, HPPWD, in terms of letter dated 27.5.1998 (Annexure A-6) which reads as under:- “To The Superintending Engineer, 10th Circle, HPPWD, Bilaspur. Subject: Request for releasing the higher pay scale of Rs.1500-2700 to diploma holders Road Inspector (now Work Inspector). Reference: Your office letter No.SE-X-BLP-WCE-16/98-11758-59 dated 17.3.98. Jai Hind. The clarification with regard to release the higher pay scale of Rs.1500-2700 to diploma holders Road Inspector (now Work Inspector) has already been conveyed/circulated to you along with others vide this office letter of even file No.24985-25084 dated 21.1.98. You are therefore, requested to take action in the matter at your own level accordingly. Sd/- (Registrar) Himachal Pradesh, PWD, Shimla -171 001.” This clarification was issued with reference to Annexure A-4. 8. Petitioners wanted to take benefits of the rules/order/notification and consequently made a representation to the respondents. 9. Acting on the petitioners’ representation the Superintendent Engineer issued a corrigendum to the office order dated 2.5.2000, revising the petitioners pay scale from Rs.3120-5160 to Rs.5000-8100. However this order, without affording any opportunity of hearing or representation to the petitioners was withdrawn unilaterally in terms of impugned office order dated 22.8.2000 (Annexure A-9) which reads as under:- Himachal Pradesh Public Works Department “OFICE ORDER” This office order No.SE-X-BLP-WECE-16/2000-5496-5500 dated 27.6.2000 is hereby withdrawn with immediate effect. Sd/- Superintending Engineer, 10th Circle, HPPWD, Bilaspur. No.SE-X-BLP-WECE-16/2000-7736-38 dated 22.8.2000” 10. Withdrawal of pecuniary benefits entails civil consequences. Petitioners were never heard nor any opportunity of representation/hearing was afforded to them before the impugned order was passed. The impugned order also does not assign any reasons. On these grounds alone the impugned order needs to be quashed. 11. However, I am of the considered view that the impugned action even otherwise is untenable in law. There is no dispute that petitioners were working as Work Inspectors and possessing a diploma from a recognized institute. There is also no dispute that as on the date of their regular appointment they were drawing a pay scale of Rs.3120-5160. It cannot be disputed that as on the date when the rules were notified the pay scale of the Work Inspector (diploma holder) was Rs.1500-2700. The Rules evidently entitled the petitioners for revision of the pay scales from Rs. 3120-5160 to Rs.5000-8100. Importantly the distinction between the diploma holder and the certificate holder was oblitered in terms of this notification. Such of those persons whose pay was fixed in the pay scale of Rs.3120-5160 were entitled to the revised enhanced pay scale. The Rules came into force on 1.1.1996. They were notified on 1.9.1998, on which date both the petitioners stood regularized as Work Inspectors. 12. Thus the action initiated by the respondents cannot be said to be in consonance with the various communications, notifications and rules issued by the State from time to time. The corrigendum dated 27.6.2000 was rightly issued in favour of the petitioners. Thus the impugned office order dated 22.8.2000 is quashed. Vide order dated 5.9.2000 passed in this petition the operation of Annexure A/9 was stayed. Consequently no recovery was effected from the petitioners. 13. As a consequence of the quashing of the impugned order, the respondents are directed to take all consequential actions, including payment of increments within a period of 3 months from the date of receipt of the certified copy of the order. With the aforesaid observations, petition stands disposed of. ( Sanjay Karol ), Judge. August 31, 2010 (rana)