ORDER :

Aftab Alam, J. - Leave granted.

2 There are four appellants in this appeal who are working as Stenographers in the Delhi Development Authority (DDA). They were appointed in the pay-scale of Rs. 1200-30-1560-EB-40-2040. They claimed the higher pay-scale of Rs. 1400-40-1800-EB-50-2300 from December 1990 on completion of three years of their service. The DDA, however, allowed them the higher scale of pay only in the year 1995 only after they qualified the test at the speed of 100 wpm in shorthand and 40 wpm in typing in terms of its office order dated September 2, 1994. Aggrieved by the decision of the DDA and the denial of the higher pay-scale from December, 1987, the appellants moved the Delhi High Court in a Writ Petition which, on formation of the Central Administrative Tribunal was transferred to it and was registered there as TA No.77 of 2007.

3. It needs to be stated here that earlier in a Writ Petition being W.P.(Civil) No.2518/1991 (Gulzari Lal Verma v. DDA), the Delhi High Court had passed an interim order staying operation of the office order of the DDA bearing Establishment No. 5024 dated December 19, 1991 by which it reversed its earlier decision and directed that the revised scale of Rs. 1400-2300 will not be sanctioned on completion of three years of service to such of the stenographers who were recruited on or after 1.1.1987.

4. When the application of the appellants came up for hearing before the Tribunal, the interim order passed by the Delhi High Court was in operation and the Tribunal held that the benefit and protection of the interim order of the Delhi High Court was equally available to the appellants. It, therefore, by its order dated May 21, 2008 allowed the appellants' claim for grant of the higher scale of pay on completion of three years of service and directed the DDA to pay them their salary in the higher pay-scale along with arrears subject, however, to the final decision by the High Court in the case of Gulzari Lal Verma.

5. The DDA challenged the order of the Tribunal before the High Court in W.P.(Civil) No.6829/2009. A Division Bench of the High Court by its judgment and order dated May 29, 2009, allowed the Writ Petition and set aside the order passed by the Tribunal. The High Court judgment is mainly based on the premise that no one among the stenographers was granted the higher scale unless he/she satisfied the standard of speed of 100 wpm in shorthand and 40 wpm in typing and, therefore, the appellants could not make out a case of adverse discrimination if they were granted the higher scale on qualifying the test and not on completion of three years of service.

6. This appeal has been preferred against the judgment and order passed by the Delhi High Court.

7. At this stage, we may take notice of certain basic facts to put the stands of the rival parties in proper prospective.

8. In October 1986, the DDA issued an advertisement for appointment to 106 posts of stenographers, including 70 posts that were reserved for SC/ST candidates. The advertisement prescribed the minimum qualifying speed of 100 wpm in shorthand and 40 wpm in typing. On the basis of the standard set out in the advertisement only 9 SC/ST candidates qualified the test along with the general candidates. As a result, 61 seats remained vacant. In that circumstance, the DDA decided to relax the standard and invited the non-selected candidates, including the four appellants to take the test at the speed of 80 wpm in shorthand and 40 wpm in typing on August 8, 1987. The appellants qualified in the test with the relaxed standard and were given appointment as stenographers. The memorandum of appointment of appellant No.1 Rajesh Kumar dated November 27, 1987 is enclosed as Annexure P.3 as specimen. In clause 12a of the memorandum it is rather oddly stipulated that the appointment was subject to passing the typing test at the speed of 36 wpm within 12 months from the date of joining the duty failing which the service would be terminated