IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. CWP Nos. 2693 & 2705 of 2010. Decided on: July 9, 2010. 1. CWP No. 2693 of 2010. Ramesh Lal & others ….. Petitioner. Versus State of H.P. & ors. ….Respondents. 2. CWP No. 2705 of 2010. Rajinder Dev & others ….. Petitioner. Versus State of H.P. & ors. ….Respondents Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Kurian Joseph, Chief Justice The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajiv Sharma, Judge. For the petitioners: Mr. Ashwani K. Sharma, Advocate. For the Respondents Mr. R.K.Sharma, Sr. Addl. AG. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Justice Kurian Joseph, C.J. (Oral) The issue raised in these Writ Petitions pertains to the claim made by the petitioners on the principle of equal pay for equal work. All the petitioners are health workers. In the Health Department, persons who were appointed before 23.7.1990 were granted the pay scale of 510-940 (pre-revised) and the same was revised to 1365-2410 w.e.f. 1.1.1986 and 4400-7000 w.e.f. 1.1.1996. Though the petitioners belong to the same cadre and are similarly situated, they were granted the pay scale of 950- 1800 initially and 3300-6200 w.e.f. 1.1.1996. Qualifications are the same, source of recruitment is the same and method of appointment also is the same. There is no difference in the discharge of duties either. The only defence of the State for this discrimination is that the State Government would have to incur heavy expense. 2 2. We find that one of us (Rajiv Sharma, J.) had an occasion to consider this issue in depth leading to judgment dated 20th April, 2010 in CWP (T) No. 1408 of 2008. On the well settled principle of equal pay for equal work, following decisions of the Supreme Court in State of H.P. vs. P.D.Attri and others 1993 SCC 217, Union of India and another vs. S.Thakur 2008 (13) SCC 463 and other decisions, it was held that the petitioners also would be entitled to the same treatment and equal pay as their compeers. Thus, the Writ Petition was disposed of directing the respondents to grant the pay scale of 1365-2410 w.e.f. the date of initial appointment and 4400-7000 w.e.f. 1.1.1996. For all the reasons stated in the judgment, these Writ Petitions are also disposed of directing the State to extend similar treatment to the petitioners herein also. 3. We find that there is direction for payment of interest @ 9% for the arrears. Since, the petitioner became entitled for the pay scale only on account of declaration made by this Court, we are of the view that it will only be just and proper that the petitioners are disbursed the arrears within a period of three months from the date of production of the copy of this judgment and if the amount is not thus disbursed only, they should be made liable for interest. Accordingly, it is made clear that in case the arrears are not disbursed within a period of three months from the date of production of the copy of this judgment by the petitioners, they shall be entitled to interest @ 9%. 4. With these observations, the Writ Petition is disposed of, so also the pending application(s), if any. Copy Dasti. (Justice Kurian Joseph), Chief Justice. July 9, 2010. ( JusticeRajiv Sharma) (karan) Judge.