C.W.P No.15017 of 2008 ::1:: IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of decision : February 12, 2009 1. C.W.P No.13331 of 2008 Shingara Singh Dhull and others vs State of Haryana and others 2. C.W.P No.15017 of 2008 Gurmail Singh and others vs State of Haryana and others 3. C.W.P No.15279 of 2008 Prem Chand Mittal and others vs State of Haryana and others *** CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE AJAY TEWARI *** Present : Mr. R.K.Malik, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Parveen K.Rohila, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. Harish Rathee, Sr. DAG Haryana for the respondents. *** 1. Whether Reporters of Local Newspapers may be allowed to see the judgment ? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not ? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest ? *** AJAY TEWARI, J This order shall dispose of CWP Nos.13331, 15017 and 15279 of 2008, as common questions of law and fact are involved therein. For the sake of convenience, facts are being extracted from CWP No.15017 of 2008. This writ petition has been filed for the issuance of a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to grant revision of pay scale w.e.f C.W.P No.15017 of 2008 ::2:: 1.1.1986 as per the decision rendered by this Court in CWP No.16743 of 2001, M.L.Wadhwa and others vs State of Haryana and others, decided on 11.4.2008. The petitioners were all Junior Engineers working in the Irrigation Department of the State of Haryana. Prior to the revision of pay w.e.f 1.1.1986, they were all in the pay scale of Rs.700-1250 and 20% were entitled for selection grade of Rs.800-1400. As per the schedule of the Haryana Civil Services (Revised Pay) Rules, 1987, the pay scale of Rs.700- 1250 was revised to Rs.1640-2900. However, for the petitioners the pay scale was revised to Rs.1400-2300 for those in the erstwhile scale of Rs.700-1250, and to Rs.1640-2900 for those in the erstwhile selection grade of Rs.800-1400. Ultimately, by order dated 27.1.1992 (Annexure P-3), this anomaly was removed and the pay scale of Rs.1400-2300 was revised to Rs.1640-2900, while the pay scale of Rs.1640-2900 was revised to Rs.2000- 3200. However, this anomaly was removed w.e.f 1.1.1992 and not from 1.1.1986. The office bearers of the union of the petitioners filed CWP No.15532 of 1994, which was allowed in the following terms :- “ Accordingly, this petition is disposed of in terms of the decision rendered in Kailash Chander Hooda's case. Admittedly, the petitioners in the present case are working as Junior Engineers and according to the ratio of the judgment in Kailash Chander Hooda's case, they are entitled to revision of pay scales w.e.f 1.1.1986 and not w.e.f 1.1.1992. The respondents are, therefore, directed to refix the pay accordingly and the arrears so calculated would be confined to a period of three years and two C.W.P No.15017 of 2008 ::3:: months prior to the filing of the present petition.” A review filed against the above judgment was also dismissed and, though SLP against the said judgment was dismissed, yet the same was implemented only qua the petitioners. As mentioned above, subsequently the case of M.L.Wadhwa and others, which was also similar to that of the petitioners, was allowed. However, benefit of arrears was restricted to the period of 38 months prior to the filing of the writ petition. The only ground urged by counsel for the respondents is that the petitioners herein belong to the Irrigation Department, while the petitioners in CWP No.15532 of 1994 were the employees of the Public Works Department, and the petitioners in M.L.Wadhwa's case were of the Public Health Department. In my opinion, the distinction being sought to be drawn is fallacious. Once the anomaly was removed for all the categories of Junior Engineers, it would not be open to the respondents to now make an attempt to differentiate between the Junior Engineers of different departments. In the circumstances, these writ petitions are allowed and the respondents are directed to grant the revised pay scale of Rs.1640-2900 and 2000-3200 w.e.f 1.1.1986 instead of 1.1.1992. However, their arrears would be restricted to a period of 38 months prior to the filing of these writ petitions. No costs. ( AJAY TEWARI ) February 12, 2009. JUDGE `kk'