SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1991 Supreme(Del) 592

B.N.KIRPAL, ARUN KUMAR
MADAN LAL – Appellant
Versus
REGISTRAR, DELHI HIGH COURT – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
A.P.AGGARWAL, MADAN LOKUR, Maninder Kaur, MUKUL ROHTAGI

B. N. Kirpal

( 1 ) THE challenge in this writ petition is to the non-fixation of the pay of the petitioner pursuant to the report of the Foutti Pay Commi- ssion.

( 2 ) THE petitioner in Class-IV employee of this Court and is working as an Usher in the pay-scale of Rs. 30u-43u. This petition appears to have been filed in a representative capacity on behalf of all the Class-1 V employees of this Court, who are Peons, crashes, Safai-Walas, Daftries, Jamadars, Junior Library Attendants, Records Sorters and Junior Gestetner Operators. This judgment will, therefore, be applicable to all these and other Class-IV employees of this Court.

( 3 ) PRIOR to the Third Pay Commission Report, these employees were in the pay-scales ranging from Rs. 196-232 to Rs. 210-270. The petitioner herein filed a Civil Writ Petition No. 2236/86, inter alia, praying that the pay of Class-IV employees of this Court should be fixed in the pay-scale of Rs. 300-430 inasmuch as similar employees in the High Court of Punjabi Haryana were drawing their salaries in this pay-scale of Rs. 300-430.

( 4 ) THE aforesaid petition was allowed by this Court vide Judgment dated 4th December, 1986. The Union of India filed a Spec













Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top