A government employee senior in service must not receive lesser pay than a junior in the same cadre, and the absence of justifiable reasons for pay disparity constitutes a violation of constitutional rights.

Jiya Lal Bhardwaj, J.

The petitioner has filed the instant petition, praying therein for the following substantive reliefs:-

“i) That the impugned action of the respondent education department rejecting the claim of the petitioner for stepping up his pay at par with his junior proforma respondent No.5 vide impugned orders dated 2.1.2009 Annexure P-6 be declared unreasonable, harsh, discriminatory and arbitrary, against the provisions of service jurisprudence and ultra vires to the Constitution.

ii) That the impugned orders dated 2.1.2009 Annexure P-6 rejecting the claim of the petitioner for grant of step up of pay may kindly be quashed and set aside being unjust, illegal, arbitrary, against all canons of law and Principle of Natural Justice, in colorable exercise of powers and in violation of the Constitution of India and the petitioner may kindly be held entitled for pay @ Rs. 7220/- instead of Rs. 6600/- at par with the proforma respondent No.5 w.e.f. February, 1998.

iii) That the respondents be directed to grant the pay to the petitioner @Rs.7220/- w.e.f. 10.02.1998 at par with proforma respondent No.5 with all consequential benefits with interest @9% per annum.”

2. The precise grouse of the petitioner, as raised in the writ petition and highlighted, is that proforma-respondent No.5, who was appointed after him was granted higher pay than him and thus, he was also entitled to the same pay.

3. Briefly, the facts as emerge from the pleadings, are that the petitioner had earlier joined the Indian Army Service on 17.06.1972 and released from there on 31.12.1989. The petitioner had rendered 17 years and 6 months service with the Indian Army. Thereafter, he got himself registered with the Employment Exchange and later on selected for JBT Training Course against the Ex-servicemen quota and underwent the training during the session 1991-93.

4. The petitioner after completion of training was appointed as JBT in the pay-scale of Rs.1200-2130/- and posted at GPS Lindi Behi in Chamba Block of Chamba District, where he joined his services on 01.03.1995. The initial pay of the petitioner was Rs.4140/-, which was further revised to Rs.6400/-.

5. Proforma-respondent No.5 had also joined the Indian Army on 22.08.1978 and after rendering about 16 years’ service released therefrom on 30.06.1994. Thereafter, he was selected for JBT Course against Ex-servicemen quota in the session 1995-97 and after completing training, he was offered appointment as JBT in the pay-scale of Rs.1200- 2130/- and was posted at GPS Dalwasa in Chamba Block, District Chamba, where he joined his duties on 10.02.1998. As per record, he was granted a sum of Rs.4550/- per month, which was later on revised to Rs.7220/- per month, whereas the petitioner was initially paid a sum of Rs.4140/- per month and later on Rs.6400/- per month.

6. The petitioner was promoted to the post of Head Teacher in the year 2000 and thereafter as Centre Head Teacher in the year 2004. The petitioner on receipt of knowledge that proforma-respondent No.5, who is junior to him, drawing more pay than him, despite the fact that the petitioner was senior to him and joined earlier to him, requested for granting same pay at par with him. The representation made by the petitioner was considered by the Block Elementary Education Officer, who after noticing the disparity had forwarded the case of the petitioner for pay fixation to respondent No.3. However, the case of the petitioner was rejected vide communication dated 02.01.2009 (Annexure P-6) for the reason that the matter regarding anomalies in pay fixation