IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP (T) No. 9657 of 2008. [OA No.2716 of 2003] Judgment reserved on 27th July, 2010. Date of Decision: 6th August, 2010. _______________________________________________________ Shri Mohan Lal and others ....Petitioners. Versus State of H.P. and others …Respondents. Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Surinder Singh, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 No. For the petitioners: Mrs. Ranjana Parmar, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. J.S. Rana, Assistant Advocate General. _________________________________________________________ Surinder Singh, J. The petitioners had filed OA No.2716 of 2003 before the erstwhile Tribunal. Since it stands abolished, as such the matters including the present were transferred to this Court and registered as CWP (T) No.9657 of 2008. 2. The petitioners are the employees of Health Department of Government of Himachal Pradesh and they have mainly sought the following relief: “(i) That the impugned Annexures A-8 and A-9 to the extent impunged may be quashed and set aside and the respondents may be directed to allow the applicants in the pay scale of Rs.5000-8100 w.e.f. 1.1.1996. (ii) That the respondents may be restrained from effecting recoveries from the applicants and in case any recovery is made, the same be refunded to the applicants alongwith interest.” 3. I have heard learned Counsel for the parties and have carefully gone through the record. 1 Whether the reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? - 2 - 4. Precisely, the facts giving rise to the present petition can be stated that. The petitioners were appointed as Clerks on the dates given below: Sr. No. Name Date of appointment as Clerk. 1. Mohan Lal 6.3.1984 2. Geeta Devi 2.7.1986 3. Hari Dass Banolta 27.1.1986 4. Mast Ram 31.1.1986 5. Pursuant to the revision of pay scales vide Notification dated 21st July, 1990 the petitioners were designated as Junior Assistants in the pay scale of Rs.1500-2700. Revision of the pay scales was notified on 28th January, 1998 which was made effective with effect from 1st January, 1996. Petitioners’ pay was re-fixed vide office order issued by the Chief Medical Officer in the higher pay band of Rs.5000- 8100. Thereafter, State Government amended the HP Civil Services Revised Pay Rules, 1998 vide Notification No.FIN- (PR)B(7)-1/98-II dated 31st May, 2001 (Annexure A-6). It provided that the posts of Junior Assistants shall be filled up by placement to the extent of 100% out of the Clerks who have an experience of working as such for a minimum period of five years in the cadre of the department in which he is working at the time of placement. It also provided that the designation and revised equivalent of the un-revised pay scale of the officials working as Senior Clerks and Junior Assistants as on 1st January, 1996 provided against column No.4 would be protected as a measure personal to them. Thereafter Addendum - 3 - Annexure A-7 was issued on 6th August, 2001. Thereafter some clarification was sought by the Department on the question of bifurcation of cadre of Clerks, which was clarified vide letter dated 3rd November, 2001. Pursuant to this, the respondents re-fixed the pay of the petitioners vide office dated 17th March, 2003 (Annexure A-9) and the petitioners who were earlier promoted as Junior Assistants in the higher pay scale were placed as Junior Assistants from prospective date, which resulted in loss of one increment to them. It is the case of the petitioners that the clarification letter could not have upset the statutory provisions. They made representations to their Department, despite that no action was taken. Since the recovery, which was not protected was sought to be made from them, thus a challenge has been made to the Annexure A-9 being wrong and illegal and also against the provisions of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India, which was allegedly issued without affording them an opportunity of hearing. Since it being stigmatic in nature having the civil consequences, as such attacked as unsustainable, hence this petition. 6. It is worthwhile to mention here that the aforesaid Notification Annexure A-9 dated 17th March, 2003 was assailed in CWP(T) No.9658 of 2008, titled as Ranjan A. Samuel and others v. State of HP and others. The Coordinate Bench of this Court has already quashed and set aside the same vide its judgment dated 22nd March, 2010. Nothing has been brought on record whether it was further assailed or there is any stay if challenged. The - 4 - petitioners are also similarly situate persons, therefore, the same benefit is required to be extended to them. Therefore, the petition is allowed on the same terms and conditions and stands disposed of. August 6th, 2010. (Surinder Singh), J. (rc)