CWP No.19889 of 2001 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP No.19889 of 2001 Date of decision: 17.9.2008 Ravi Nandan Sharma …… Petitioner Versus Punjab and Haryana High Court …….Respondent CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR GARG Present: Mr. K.K. Jagia, Advocate and Mr. Sukhdev Singh, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Amit Jain, Advocate for the respondent. * * * * Rakesh Kumar Garg, J . The petitioner retired from the service of the respondent on 30.4.1992 as Deputy Registrar. The grievance of the petitioner in the writ petition is that his request for correct refixation of his pay while in service and consequential re-determination of the retiral benefit has been rejected summarily and illegally vide order dated 5.10.2001 Annexure P-9 and he is entitled to the benefits as claimed. It is the case of the petitioner that vide judgment dated 6.8.1987 passed in CWP No.2363 of 1986 titled as Sunder Sham Kapoor and others v. Hon’ble Chief Justice and others, a writ of mandamus was issued to the respondents to treat 23.1.1975 as the date of enforcement of High Court Establishment Rules and on the basis thereof, to grant to the petitioner and other employees similarly situated their arrears of pay and allowances along with other consequential benefits, to which they are entitled under the rules. In compliance with the aforesaid judgment, Office order dated 17.11.1987 was issued. However the operation of the aforesaid Office order was stayed in CWP No.2359 of 1988 and finally the writ CWP No.19889 of 2001 2 petition was decided by this Court on 28.1.1992 and the matter was finally decided in Civil Appeal No.1248 of 1993 by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India vide order dated 8.1.1997. The grievance of the petitioner is that in compliance of the said order, he was paid. The benefits however, on further verification, he found that even the amount paid to him as arrears w.e.f. 23.1.1975 to 2.5.1978 were much less and incorrect as he was actually entitled to get arrears of difference of pay and allowances and other consequential benefits etc. for the period from 23.1.1975 to 30.4.1992. As per the averments made in the writ petition, the petitioner claimed entitlement to refixation of pay at Rs.1200/- per month as Superintendent Grade-II w.e.f. 3.5.1978 instead of Rs.1120/- as fixed by the respondent w.e.f. 2.1.1978 and thereafter, his pay is required to be stepped up every year upto to the post of Deputy Registrar. In addition to the above, the petitioner claims entitlement to arrears of Special Pay of Rs.50/- per month granted to the Revisor w.e.f. 5.8.1980 in view of the judgement dated 8.1.1997 passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India as he had lien on this post as substantive permanent Revisor upto the date of his confirmation as Superintendent Grade-II i.e. 7.2.1984. So he was entitled to get this benefit for the period from 5.8.1980 to 30.4.1981 as special pay of Rs.50/- was granted to the Superintendent Grade-II w.e.f 1.5.1981. The petitioner has further mentioned that he was promoted as selection grade Superintendent w.e.f. 1.1.1987 vide office order dated 26.5.1987. However, the benefit of one increment on account of promotion in the higher grade of Rs.1200-1700+100 as Special Pay was also not given to him when fixing pay in the new revised scale so therefore, he is entitled to get this benefit from 1.1.1987 to 31.3.1988 as thereafter, he was promoted as Assistant Registrar. Thus, the petitioner is claiming refixation of his pay as Revisor w.e.f. 23.1.1975 to 2.5.1978 and Superintendent Grade-II from CWP No.19889 of 2001 3 3.5.1978 onwards and stepped up thereafter upto the post of Deputy Registrar with consequential benefits accruing therefrom and arrears of difference of pay and allowances for the period from 23.1.1975 to 30.4.1992. The petitioner has also prayed for revision of his pension w.e.f. 1.5.1992 and payment of arrears of difference on refixation of pension. The writ petition has been contested by the respondent. The preliminary objection has been taken that the writ petition suffers from delay and laches. The petitioner had retired from service on 30.4.1992. The pay of the petitioner was refixed as a result of decision of Civil Appeal No.1248 of 1993 on 3.1.1997 and all the arrears were paid to him in December 1997 itself whereas the present writ petition has been filed after four years of the said payment and under these circumstances, the writ petition badly suffers from delay and laches and is liable to be dismissed as such. It has been specifically stated that the re-fixation of his pay has already been done correctly. He was granted selection Grade of Rs. 300-25-600 as Sr.Translator w.e.f. 20.5.1977 and his pay was fixed at Rs. 425/-. However , after the creation of the post of Revisor w.e.f. 23.1.1975, he was granted special pay of Rs.50/- w.e.f. 23.1.1975 in addition to the pay which he was drawing as Sr. Translator. Thereafter he was promoted as Deputy Superintendent w.e.f . 22.11.75 in the grade of Rs. 350-650 and in the revised scale of Rs.350-800, but was allowed benefit as such w.e.f 3.5.1978(FN). The posts of Revisor and Supdt. Grade II were equated posts in the same time scale so no pay fixation was involved in their appointment . Therefore , the pay of the petitioner fixed at Rs. 970/- plus Rs.50/- as on 2.5.1978 as Supdt.Gr. II is in order. It has been further stated in the written statement that in the year 1986 Shri S.S .Kapoor and other Revisors/ Translators of this Court filed a C.W.P. No. 2363 of 1986 for their re-designation as Revisor/Translators on CWP No.19889 of 2001 4 the establishment of the Court w.e.f. 1.3.1974 and the same was allowed on 6.8.1987 and it was held that High Court Establishment Rules, 1973 shall come into force w.e.f . 23.1.1975. Thereafter, the matter was examined on the administrative side by this Court and Revisors and Translators were granted the following scales of pay and special pay from the dates noted below vide office order issued vide endst.no. 27402/ E.I. dated 17.11.1987:- Sr. No. Post Date Scale of Pay 1. Revisors ( i) 23.1.1975 Rs.225-15-360/20-500 plus Rs.50/- p.m. as special pay (ii) 1.1.1978 Rs.600-20-700-25-850/30- 1000-40-1080-40-1120+Rs.20 p.m. as special pay (iii) 5.8.1980 Rs.800-25-850-30-1000-40- 1200-50-1400+Rs.50 p.m as special pay 2. Translators (i) 23.1.1975 Rs.225-15-360/20-500 (ii) 1.1.1975 Rs.600-20-700-25-850-30- 1000-40-1080-40-1120 (iii) 5.8.1980 50% posts of Translators in the Senior Scale of Assistants i.e. Rs.800-25-850-30-1000/40- 1200-50-1400 Aggrieved with the office order dated 17.11.1987, some of the Revisors of this Court whose pay was to be reduced and recovery was required to be effected, filed C.W.P. 2359 of 1988, praying therein that the office order dated 17.11.1987 may be quashed and they may be equated with that of Supdt.Grade II w.e.f. 23.1.1975. Finally, the said writ petition was allowed on 28.1.1992 and it had been directed that the petitioners were given equivalent pay scale as that of Supdt.Grade II w.e.f. 23.1.1975 and it was further directed that the difference of arrears of pay between the posts of Superintendant Grade II CWP No.19889 of 2001 5 and the pay scale of the petitioners, be paid within four months from the date of judgement. Aggrieved with the decision of writ petition, this Court preferred Letters Patent Appeal No. 615 of 1992, which was also dismissed on 27.8.1992 but the time granted for implementing the judgement of CWP No.2359 of 1988 was further extended by three months on the application moved by this Court for extension of time . Thereafter, this Court had filed S.L.P. in the Hon’ble Apex Court. Finally, the C.A. No. 1248 of 1993 was allowed by the Hon’ble Apex Court on 8.1.1997 and Revisors of this Court were equated with that of Supdt. Grade II w.e.f. 5.8.1980 and it was specifically held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court that the amendment in the schedule I to the 1973 Rules be made applicable w.e.f. 5.8.1980 and not from the 23.1.75 as was held by the Ld.Single Judge in C.W.P. No.2359 of 1988. It is also relevant to mention here that no order of interest was made in the judgment and the same is, thus, deemed to be declined. Thereafter, the case was processed for releasing difference of pay w.e.f. 5.8.1980 in view of the decision of S.L.P and accordingly arrears were released. Thereafter, in view of the judicial verdict rendered by Hon’ble the Supreme Court of India, pay fixation in relation to the erstwhile Revisors as on 23.1.1975 and thereafter. With regards to other contents of the para, it is submitted that the case of Shri Ravi Nandan, Petitioner is similar to that of other Revisors. Accordingly after the decision rendered by Hon’ble Supreme Court of India, the pay of the petitioner was fixed after perusing the relevant records. Resultantly arrears accrued to the petitioner also stood released to the petitioner and this fact has also been admitted by the petitioner in the petition itself:- CWP No.19889 of 2001 6 Pay drawn in old scale Pay fixed in view of judgement in 225-15-360/20-500 CWP No.2363/86 in the scale of ` Rs.225-15-360-20-500+50 as Special Pay w.e.f. 23.1.1975 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 23.1.1975 380/- Rs.380/-+50 as Special Pay 1.11.1975 Rs.400/-+50 as S.P. 1.11.1976 Rs.420/-+50/- as S.P. 1.11.1977 Rs.440/-+50/- as S.P. Revised Scale of Rs.600-1120+50 as S.P. w.e.f. 1.1.1978 1.1.1978 Rs.970/-+50/- as S.P. 2.5.1978 Rs.970/-+50/- as S.P. Thereafter, the petitioner was promoted as S.Gr.II w.e.f. 3.5.1978. It is further submitted in the written statement of the respondent that since the posts of Revisors and Supdt.Grade II were equated in the time scale of Rs.300-600, so no pay fixation was involved, therefore the pay of the petitioner fixed at Rs. 970/- plus Rs.50/- as on 2.5.1978 as Revisor is in order. Thus finally it was submitted that no grievance of the petitioner is left to be reappraised as his pay has rightly been fixed as per the details given in the foregoing paragraphs. It was prayed that the writ petition be dismissed. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. From the stand taken by the respondent, it is crystal clear that the post of Revisor was equated with the post of Superintendent Grade II and the pay of the petitioner was re-fixed in accordance with the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court dated 8.1.1997 and the petitioner was paid the arrears. The only grouse of the petitioner is that his pay has not been re- fixed correctly. However, learned counsel for the petitioner was unable to CWP No.19889 of 2001 7 point out any mistake in the refixation of his pay as explained in the written statement of the respondent . The dispute herein is of calculations which cannot be made by this Court while exercising its jurisdiction under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India. Even otherwise, the petitioner had retired from service in the year 1992 and his arrears if any stood paid to him after the order dated 8.1.1997 passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in CA No.1248 of 1993. The petitioner kept quite for four years thereafter and has raised the present issue after four years of the last payment and after 9 years of his retirement whereas even the normal period of limitation recovery of any dues under civil law has expired. In view of the above, I am not inclined to invoke the writ jurisdiction in the present case. Dismissed. September 17, 2008 (RAKESH KUMAR GARG) ps JUDGE CWP No.19889 of 2001 8 CWP No.19889 of 2001 9