IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.750 of 2003 Decided on : December 22, 2008 Ranbir Sipahiya …Petitioner. Versus State of H.P. and others …Respondents. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. R.B. Misra, Judge. The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Surjit Singh, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioner : Mr. Subhash Sharma, Advocate. For the Respondents : Mr. P.K. Sharma, Additional Advocate General, with Mr. P.M. Negi, Deputy Advocate General, for respondents No.1 to 3. Per Surit Singh, Judge( Oral ) Writ petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 22nd November, 2002, passed by the H.P. State Administrative Tribunal (now defunct) and has, therefore, sought its judicial review, by filing the present writ petition, under Articles 226 & 227 of the Constitution of India. 2. We may first notice the relevant facts, which are not in dispute. Petitioner was working as Labour-cum-Conciliation Officer in the State of Himachal Pradesh, when revision of pay- scales, effective from 1st January, 1986, took place. The Government of Himachal Pradesh follows the Government of Punjab State in the matter of grant of pay-scales to its employees. The Punjab Government, vide notification Annexure Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? …2… P-1, revised the pay-scales of Labour-cum-Conciliation Officers from 825-1580 to 2000-3500. The notification read that out of 23 posts of Labour-cum-Conciliation Officers, 12 posts were to be re-designated as Assistant Labour Commissioners and incumbent of those posts were to be given the higher scale of 2100-2700. In the State of Himachal Pradesh there were six posts of Labour-cum-Conciliation Officers, at the relevant time. Petitioner was holding one of such posts. The State of Himachal Pradesh also revised the pay-scales of Labour-cum-Conciliation Officer, on Punjab pattern, and the revised scale was 2000-3500. Himachal Pradesh Government did not re-designate any of the Labour-cum-Conciliation Officers as Assistant Labour Commissioner and consequently the higher scale of 2100-2700 was not granted to any of them. 3. Petitioner made representation to the State Government for grant of higher scale of 2100-2700 to some of the Labour-cum-Conciliation Officers, by re-designating them as Assistant Labour Commissioners, on Punjab pattern. His representation was rejected. He then filed an Original Application, seeking the same relief. That has been dismissed by the Tribunal, with the finding that the State of Himachal Pradesh is bound to follow the Punjab pattern in the matter of pay-scales of its employees, but not with regard to the staffing pattern, that is to say creation/up-gradation/re-designation of the posts, on the pattern of Punjab Government. Petitioner is not satisfied with the order of the Tribunal and so he has sought review of the order. …3… 4. We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as also the learned Additional Advocate General representing the respondent-State. 5. In the reply filed by the respondents before the Tribunal, it was stated that in the State of Punjab there was a post of Assistant Labour Commissioner, even prior to the revision of pay-scales, effective from 1st January, 1986 and the re-designation of 12, out of 23 posts of Labour Officer-cum- Conciliation Officers as Assistant Labour Commissioners, while granting revised pay-scales. It was stated that in H.P. State there had not been any post of Assistant Labour Commissioner. This position was not disputed. 6. Now, when there was already one post of Assistant Labour Commissioner in the State of Punjab, that means the re- designation of 12, our of 23 posts of Labour Officer-cum- Conciliation Officers, was in fact up-gradation of such 12 posts, though the nomenclature used is only re-designation. It was not the entire cadre of Labour Officer-cum-Conciliation Officers, in the State of Punjab, which was re-designated as Assistant Labour Commissioner, but only 12, out of 23 posts, were “re- designated” as such, which, as already noticed, in our considered view, was in substance up-gradation of 12 posts. For the remaining 11 posts, the pay-scale was 2000-3500. As already noticed, higher scale of 2100-2700 was for the re-designated (upgraded) posts. In Himachal Pradesh no post has been upgraded and the pay-scale of 2000-3500 has been given to all the Labour-cum-Conciliation Officers. This revised pay-scale is …4… the same as has been granted by the Punjab Government (on revision) to those of its Labour-cum-Conciliation Officers, who have not been re-designated/upgraded as Assistant Labour Commissioners. 7. Our Bench in another case Smt. Krishna Sood and another versus State of H.P. and another, CWP No.987 of 2000, decided on 28th November, 2008, has held that the State of Himachal Pradesh is committed to follow the State of Punjab only in the matter of revision of pay-scales of its employees and not in the matter of creation/up-gradation/re-designation of posts on Punjab pattern. For the foregoing reasons, we see no ground for interference with the order of the Tribunal. Hence, the writ petition is dismissed. ( R.B. Misra ), J. December 22, 2008(sd) ( Surjit Singh ), J.