IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. CWP (T) No. 7824/2008 Reserved on:7.8.2009 Decided on:9.9. 2009 ________________________________________________ Colonel (Retired) Panjab Singh Vr. C. …Petitioner. Versus State of Himachal Pradesh and others. … Respondents. __________________________________________________________ Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajiv Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 No. For the petitioner : Mr. P.P. Chauhan, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. R.K. Sharma, Sr. Addl. A.G. with Mr. Rajindger Dogra, Addl. A.G. ________________________________________________________ Rajiv Sharma, Judge . Brief facts necessary for the adjudication of this petition are that the petitioner joined the Indian Army on 11.1.1960. He served the Indian Army up to 24.6.1993. He was appointed as Director, Sainik Welfare Department, Himachal Pradesh vide order dated 11.10.1993. He joined his duties on 15.10.1993. His pay was fixed vide office orders Annexures A-1 to A-3. In Annexure A-1, the last pay drawn from the Army has been shown at Rs. 5100/-. In Annexures A-2 and 1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? No. 2 A-3, last pay drawn on retirement from service has been shown as Rs. 6100/- (basic pay Rs. 5100 + rank pay Rs. 1000/-). Consequent upon the revision of pay scale of the Government employees with effect from 1.1.1996, the pay of the petitioner was fixed in the pay scale of Rs. 13,500-16,800 with effect from 1.1.1996. He made several representations to the respondents to consider his case after taking into consideration his last pay drawn on retirement from Army at Rs. 6100/- instead of Rs. 5300/-. He also highlighted in his representation Annexure A-16 dated 24.11.1997. He also brought to the notice of the authorities Annexure A-17. The pension of the petitioner was fixed by the defence authorities at Rs. 5500/-. The case of the petitioner was turned down by the respondents on 22.4.2000. According to the petitioner, his pay with effect from 1.1.1996 was to be fixed at Rs. 17,100/- instead of at Rs. 15,100/-. Mr. P.P. Chauhan, Advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioner has strenuously argued that the pay of the petitioner was to be fixed at Rs. 6400/- i.e. Rs. 6100/- last pay drawn plus Rs. 300/- on account of rendering two years service. He has also vehemently argued that the pay of the petitioner with effect from 1.1.1996 was to be fixed at Rs. 17,100/- instead of Rs. 15,100/-. He has relied upon para 4 of Annexure A-16 dated 24.11.1997 and Annexure A-7. Mr. R.K. Sharma, learned Senior Additional Advocate General has vehemently argued that the pay of the petitioner has been fixed strictly as per instructions issued on 1.12.1989/8.9.1999. He has further argued that after the issuance of Annexure A-17, no decision has been taken by the State Government. In other words, his plea is that the pay of the petitioner has been fixed in accordance with law. 3 I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have perused the record carefully. The petitioner was serving as a Colonel at the time of his retirement. He was placed in the pay scale of Rs. 2300-5100. However, he was entitled to rank pay @ Rs. 1000/- at the time of his retirement. He was appointed as Director, Sainik Welfare Department, Himachal Pradesh in the year 1993. He has earned two increments. These two increments were required to be taken into consideration while fixing the pay of the petitioner by treating Rs. 6100/- as last pay drawn on retirement from the Army service. The respondents for the reasons best known to them have fixed the pay of the petitioner at Rs. 5300/-, though in the reply it has been admitted that the pay of the petitioner was required to be fixed at Rs. 6100/- and necessary orders were to be issued. However, the fact of the matter is that the petitioner was entitled to two increments and his pay was to be fixed after taking into consideration the last pay drawn from the Army after his retirement at Rs. 6400/-. The petitioner’s pay has been re-fixed by the respondents at Rs. 15,100/- vide Annexure A-4 in the pay scale of Rs. 13,500-16,800. The State Government while fixing the pay of the petitioner at Rs. 15,100/- per month has not extended the benefits to the petitioner to which the re-employed officers were entitled on the basis of notional pay fixation, if they were appointed before 1.1.1996. The revised notional basic pay of a Colonel is Rs. 17,100/- of basic pay with effect from 1.1.1996. He had already put in two years’ service. The State Government has also not taken into consideration Annexure A-16 dated 24.11.1997. The decision was required to be taken by the State Government with 4 promptitude to redress the grievance of the petitioner. The State Government cannot be permitted to sleep over the rights of the petitioner and similarly situate persons for more than a decade. The inaction on the part of the respondents has deprived the petitioner his legitimate right to get the pensionery benefits on the basis of re- fixation of salary at Rs. 17,100/-, including Death-cum-Retirement Gratuity and leave encashment. What emerges from the aforesaid discussion is that the pay of the petitioner was to be fixed by treating his last pay drawn on retirement from Army at Rs. 6100/- plus two increments instead of Rs. 5100/-. The pay of the petitioner was required to be further revised after giving him the benefit of notional pay of the post of Colonel i.e. at Rs. 17,100/- instead of Rs. 15,100/- per month. Accordingly, in view of the observations made hereinabove, the petition is disposed of. The respondents are directed to re-fix the pay of the petitioner in view of the observations made hereinabove and also to work out the retiral benefits within a period of eight weeks from today. The petitioner is held entitled to interest @ 9% per annum on the monetary benefits. No costs. (Rajiv Sharma), J. 9.9. 2009. *awasthi*