Back
High Court Of Delhi
MADAN LAL - Appellant
Versus
REGISTRAR, DELHI HIGH COURT - Respondent
Civil 3464 of 1990
Decided On : 11/04/1991
FIXATION OF PAY - CLASS-IV EMPLOYEES OF HIGH COURT - REVISED PAY-SCALE - DETERMINATION - APPROPRIATE SCALE - INTEREST ON ARREARS OF SALARY.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, a Class-IV employee of the High Court, filed a writ petition challenging the non-fixation of his pay pursuant to the report of the Fourth Pay Commission. The petitioner and other Class-IV employees were drawing their salaries in the pay-scale of Rs. 300-430, which was fixed in accordance with a previous judgment of the High Court. The Central Government had constituted the Fourth Pay Commission, and the revised pay-scales recommended by the Commission were made applicable to the employees of the Government and other Departments w.e.f. 1st January 1986. However, the pay-scales of the Class-IV employees of the High Court had not been fixed.
Finding of the Court:
The High Court held that the respondents were under an obligation to determine and appropriate revised scale of pay in respect to the Class-IV employees of the Court. The Court found that the pay-scale of the petitioner of Rs. 300-430 not being in dispute, having been finally settled by the Supreme Court, the respondents were under an obligation to determine and appropriate revised scale of pay in respect to the Class-IV employees of this Court. The Court further held that the pay-scale of the Class-IV employees had to be determined pursuant to the Fourth Pay Commission Report, which had been made applicable by the Government itself to the other employees of this Court.
Issues: 1. Whether the respondents were under an obligation to determine and appropriate revised scale of pay in respect to the Class-IV employees of the High Court? 2. Whether the pay-scale of the Class-IV employees had to be determined pursuant to the Fourth Pay Commission Report?
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The High Court held that the respondents were under an obligation to determine and appropriate revised scale of pay in respect to the Class-IV employees of the Court. The Court found that the pay-scale of the petitioner of Rs. 300-430 not being in dispute, having been finally settled by the Supreme Court, the respondents were under an obligation to determine and appropriate revised scale of pay in respect to the Class-IV employees of this Court. The Court further held that the pay-scale of the Class-IV employees had to be determined pursuant to the Fourth Pay Commission Report, which had been made applicable by the Government itself to the other employees of this Court. 2. The High Court held that the pay-scale of the Class-IV employees had to be determined pursuant to the Fourth Pay Commission Report. The Court found that the said Report had been made applicable by the Government itself to the other employees of this Court and there was no reason as to why Class-IV employees should be excluded.
Final Decision: The High Court allowed the writ petition and directed the respondents to fix the pay of the petitioner and other Class-IV employees of the Court in the revised pay-scale of Rs. 975-25-1150-EB-30-1660 in accordance with the Central Civil Services (revised pay) Rules 1986. The Court also directed the respondents to pay interest @ 15% per annum on the arrears of salary from 6th December 1988 till the date of payment.
( 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 Special Leave Petition being No. 5002/87 and on 1st May, 1987 the Supreme Court dismissed the said SLP.
( 5 ) AS a result of the aforesaid decision the petitioner and other Class-IV employees got their pay fixed in the pay-scale of Rs. 300-430 w. e. f. 1st January, 1978.
( 6 ) THE Central Government had constituted the Fourth Pay Commission. The said Commission gave its report which made the scales recommended by it applicable w. e. f. 1st January, 1986. The High Court, like the Supreme Court, was not covered by the said Pay Commission Report. As the pay-scales recommended by the Fourth Pay Commission, and accepted by the Central Government, are also applied to the High Court by separate orders, the then Chief Justice of this Court on 8th March, 1988 wrote to the Minister of Law and Justice recommending different pay-scales for various categories of employees of this Court. In respect of the Class-IV employees the recommendation of the Chief Justice was that they should be placed in the revised pay-scale of Rs. 975-1540. This was, according to the Chief Justice, the scale which was corresponding to the existing pay-scale of Rs. 300-430.
( 7 ) THE Central Government wrote a letter dated 6th December, 1988 wherein it was, inter alia, stated that revision of pay-scales regarding L. D. Cs, Restorers and other Class-IV employees will be conveyed later on after a decision is taken by the Supreme Court in a case which was pending before It. The Central Government, however, accorded approval in respect of employees of this Court who were in a scale higher than that of the L. D. Cs.
( 8 ) TWO of the categories in respect of which pay had not been fixed because of the said letter were that of Restorers and L. D. Cs. They then filed a writ petition being C. Writ No. 3462/89, Rohtas Kumar and Others v. Union of India. One of the contentions raised by the Union of India was that the Supreme Court, had in respect of its own employees, yet to take decision with regard to scales of pay which should be applicable to them and, therefore, the pay of those petitioners could not be fixed Vide our judgment dated 9th October, 1990, this and the other contentions of the respondents, were rejected. It was, inter alia, held that the Supreme Court was concerned with its own employees and far as the High Court employees were concerned, their pay-scales had already been fixed, prior to the proposed revision w. e. f. 1st January, 1986, and after the Fourth Pay Commission Report, the equivalent scales of pay were to be made applicable to the High Court employees. The writ petition having been allowed, the respondents, once again, filed a Special Leave Petition to the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court, once again, vide their order dated 21st January, 1991 dismissed the Special Leave Pet
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
