IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH SHIMLA CWP(T) No. 5548 of 2008 Date of Decision : July 30, 2010 Sh. Shadi Lal Petitioner Versus State of Himachal Pradesh and others Respondents Coram: The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Karol, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 No. For the petitioner : Mr. Ranjan Sharma, Advocate, for the petitioner. For the respondents : Mr. R. K. Sharma, Senior Addl. Advocate General with Mr. Rajesh Mandhotra, Dy. A.G. for the respondents/State. Sanjay Karol, J. (Oral) The learned Counsel for the petitioner confines the petition to the following reliefs:- “7. (ii) That the Respondents may be directed to fix the pay of the applicant in the revised pay scales of Rs. 200-450/- w.e.f. 1.11.1966 by giving the benefits of ADA and TA of Rs. 25/- and 20/- P.M. forthwith. (iv) That the Respondents may be directed to give the proficiency increment after 8/18 years of service w.e.f. 26.9.71/26.9.81.” Whether reports of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 2. The respondents in spite of several opportunities have not filed their reply. The request of Mr. R. K. Sharma, learned Sr. Addl. Advocate General for the respondents/State to file reply after a period of twelve years is turned down. 3. While working as a Mechanical Instructor petitioner was drawing a total salary/emoluments amounting to Rs. 280/-. This included his pay, dearness pay, dearness allowance, temporary allowance and service benefit in the unrevised scale of Rs. 150-300. This is evident from Annexure A-2. However while working his revised scale his emoluments were reworked and in terms of Annexure A-2 his total pay was reduced to Rs. 240/-. Noticeably the component of T.A. and A.D.A. was not taken into account for fixing the pay in the revised scale of Rs. 200-450. 4. The Government has issued a circular (Annexure A-3) wherein it is provided under Clause 6(2)(b) which reads as under: “(b) If initial pay in the revised scale as worked out under these orders is less than or equal to the existing emoluments, the initial pay in the revised scale shall be fixed at the stage next above the existing emoluments.” 5. Annexure A-3 was subsequently amended vide letter dated 30.9.1970 (Annexure A-4) wherein it was provided that for the purpose of fixation of pay in new scales, the existing pay will be basic pay in the existing scale plus dearness pay plus temporary allowance plus dearness allowance sanctioned before 1.11.66. The benefit of Rs. 10/- is additionally to be paid thereupon. 3 6. There is no dispute that benefit of these emoluments were accorded and sanctioned to the petitioner prior 1.11.66. Thus the respondent/authorities have erred in not according the same to the petitioner while calculating his total emoluments in terms of Annexures A-2 and A-6. 7. Respondents are therefore directed to take consequential action within a period of three months from the date of the receipt of the certified copy of the order. The consequential action be also taken within the said period. It is clarified that if the arrears of the sum due, if any, are not released to the petitioner within the aforesaid period, then thereafter, he shall be entitled to interest @ 6% p.a. The benefit of proficiency step up shall also be accorded to the petitioner in accordance with the Rules. 8. With the aforesaid observations the present petition stands disposed of. (Sanjay Karol), Judge. July 30, 2010 (PK)