C.W.P. No.13452 of 2007 [ 1 ] IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH C.W.P. No.13452 of 2007 Date of Decision: July 19,2011 Om Parkash Alipura ...................................... Petitioner Versus State of Punjab ....................................... Respondent Coram: Hon'ble Ms. Justice Ritu Bahri 1.To be referred to the Reporters or not? 2. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? Present: Mr. Kapil Kakkar, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Gazi Mohd. Umair, DAG, Punjab. ... RITU BAHRI, J. (Oral) This writ petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India is for setting aside the order of pay fixation dated 4.8.1998 (Annexure P3/1). Petitioner's wife Smt. Prem Jindal, Director, Public Instructions, Punjab, expired on 14.6.2006. After her death petitioner is the sole heir of Smt. Prem Jindal. Other legal heirs of Smt. Prem Jindal have filed their affidavits to this effect which are attached with the writ petition as Annexures P1/1 to P1/3. Petitioner has been named as her nominee for C.W.P. No.13452 of 2007 [ 2 ] the gratuity and family pension. Arrears of medical reimbursement have been paid to the petitioner. Vide the impugned order (Annexure P3/1) pay of Smt. Prem Jindal had been fixed with effect from 1.1.1996 at `16350/- i.e. minimum of the scale. Smt. Prem Jindal's claim for promotion was on the basis of reservation which was subject matter of Writ Petition No. 10952 of 1988. On 1.3.1996 the Supreme Court allowed the appeal filed by Smt. Prem Jindal holding that the roaster point for reservation is on the post and not on the vacancies as was the practice in the State of Punjab. Smt. Prem Jindal was promoted with effect from 25.9.1989 but arrears from 25.9.1989 to 11.8.1993 were declined to her vide order dated 26.8.1997 (Annexure P2). Her pay was re-fixed in the unrevised pay scale of `4500- 6100 (Annexure P3). Subsequently, her pay was re-fixed with effect from 1.1.1996 in the pay scale of ` 16350-20100 vide order dated 4.8.1998 (Annexure P3/1). Counsel for the petitioner has argued that this pay fixation has been done without giving the benefit of the increments which she had earned prior to 1.1.1996. Reference is made to proviso to Rule 7 of the Revised Pay Scales Rules, 1998 which is reproduced as under:- “7. Fixation of pay in the revised scale:- The pay of a Government employee who opts or is deemed to have opted for the revised scale in terms of the C.W.P. No.13452 of 2007 [ 3 ] provisions of these rules shall, unless in any case the Government by special order otherwise directs, be fixed in the following manner, namely:- (i) an amount representing forty percent of the basic pay in the existing scale shall be added to the 'existing emoluments so computed, if it falls between two stages: Provided that:- (a) if the minimum of the revised scale is more than the amount so arrived at, the pay shall be fixed at the minimum of the revised scale; (b) if the amount so arrived at is higher than the maximum of the revised scale, the amount in excess of the maximum of the revised scale shall be treated as personal pay which shall be absorbed in future increments and shall be reckoned as pay for all purposes: Provided further that where in the fixation of pay, the pay of Government employees drawing pay of more than three consecutive stages in an existing scale gets bunched, that is to say, gets fixed in the revised scale at the same stage, the pay in the revised scale of such of those Government employees who are drawing pay beyond the first three consecutive stages in the existing scale shall C.W.P. No.13452 of 2007 [ 4 ] be stepped up by the grant of increment (s) in the revised scale in the following manner; namely:- (a) for the Government employees drawing pay from the fourth upto the sixth stage in the existing scale-by one increment; (b) for the Government employees drawing pay from the seventh upto the ninth stage in the existing scale, if there is bunching beyond the sixth stage – by one increment; (c) for the Government employees drawing pay from the tenth upto the twelfth stage in the existing scale, if there is bunching beyond the ninth stage – by three increments. (d) for the Government employees drawing pay from the thirteenth upto the fifteenth stage in the existing scale, if there is bunching beyond the twelfth stage – by four increments.” As per this proviso, at the time of fixation of pay every Government employee is to get the benefit of one increment in the revised scale for every three increments earned in the pre-revised scale. Despite the representation submitted by Smt. Prem Jindal, no orders have been passed for giving the benefit of increments earned in the pre- revised scale. In the meantime, the petitioner was held entitled to arrears of pay for the post of Director from C.W.P. No.13452 of 2007 [ 5 ] 25.9.1989 till 11.8.1993 along with 6% interest by this Court vide order dated 16.11.2005 passed in CWP No. 2355 of 1998 (Annexure P-10). The controversy for granting benefit of increment at the time of pay fixation with effect from 1.1.1996 has no connection with the arrears of salary which the petitioner has got vide judgment dated 16.11.2005. Counsel for the petitioner has referred to the pay fixation order of Smt. Darshan Kaur, Director, who is junior to Smt. Prem Kaur and was given the benefit of bunching of the increments as per proviso 7 to Rule 7 of the Revised Pay Scales Rules, 1998 (Annexure P4). No reply has been filed by the State despite numerous opportunities. This writ petition is being allowed and a direction is being given to the Department to pass appropriate orders granting benefit of bunching of increments to Smt.Prem Jindal, wife of the petitioner, as given to Smt. Darshan Kaur vide order Annexure P4 with effect from 1.1.1996 and in view of proviso 7 to Rule 7 of the Revised Pay Scales Rules, 1998. This exercise shall be completed within a period of three months and the petitioner is held entitled to interest at the rate of 6% with effect from the date it was given to Smt. Darshan Kaur. 19.7.2011 ( RITU BAHRI ) Rupi JUDGE