IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. CWP (T) No.8214 of 2008. Decided on: 23rd March, 2010. Sohan Lal Gupta. …Petitioner. Versus H.P.State Electricity Board & anr. …Respondents. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Kurian Joseph, Chief Justice The Hon’ble Mr. Justice R.B. Misra, Judge. For the petitioner : Mr. Ajay Chandel, Advocate. For the Respondents : Mr. Shashi Shirshoo, Advocate. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Justice Kurian Joseph, C.J. (Oral) The petitioner has filed the writ petition with the following prayer: “(i) That the respondents may kindly be directed to step up the pay of the applicant and fix the same at par with the pay of Smt. Kamlesh Tandon who is junior to the applicant w.e.f. 1.1.97.” When the Tribunal was abolished, the matter was transferred to this Court and hence the writ petition. We find from the Note supplied to us that the Board is in active consideration of the case of the petitioner. In fact, in the Note supplied, it has been noted thus: “The anomaly in the pay of Sh. Sohan Lal and Smt. Kamlesh Malhotra, has been arisen due to the application of F.R. 2 22(1) on completion of 23 years of his junior Smt. Kamlesh Malhotra and nor due to none exercise the option by Sh. Sohan Lal Gupta under provision of F.R. 22(1)(a)(i) on completion of 23 years service on 5.2.91 and as such the pay of Sh. Sohan Lal Gupta can be stepped up equal to the pay of his junior Smt. Kamlesh Malhotra from Rs.9400/- to Rs.9700/- w.e.f. 1.1.97 with next increment on 1.1.98 accordingly. In view of above the proposal to step up the pay of Sh. Sohan Lal, Supdt. Gr.-II now S.O. equal to the pay of his junior Smt. Kamlesh Malhotra, Supdt.Gr.-II now S.O. from Rs.9400/- to Rs.9700/- w.e.f. 1.1.97 with next date of increment on 1.1.98 is passed on to C.A.O. for concurrence.” The learned counsel appearing for the Board submits that only because the case is pending before this Court, a decision has not yet been taken by the Board. Therefore, this writ petition is disposed of directing the first respondent to take appropriate action in accordance with law on Annexure A-9 (representation) in the light of the noting we have referred to above. Necessary orders in that regard shall be passed within a period of one month from the date of the production of a copy of this judgment and consequential benefits, if any, flowing out of the order shall be disbursed to the petitioner within another one month. The petitioner shall also be entitled to simple interest at the rate of 7% from the date of the noting, we have extracted above. Dasti copy. (Justice Kurian Joseph), Chief Justice 23rd March , 2010 ( Justice R.B. Misra ), (tr) Judge. 3