The State of Himachal Pradesh is not mandated to follow pay scales set by another State; employer discretion in service conditions is reaffirmed.

JUDGMENT :

Ranjan Sharma, J.

The State of Himachal Pradesh, being the petitioner, has come up before this Court praying for the issuance of writ of certiorari, by quashing the common order dated 13.04.2018 [Annexure P-1], passed by the Himachal Pradesh State Administrative Tribunal (referred to as the “Tribunal” herein), in Transferred Application(s), TA No. 2526 of 2015, titled as Himachal Pradesh Cooperative Department Non-Gazetted Employees Association versus State of Himachal Pradesh and others and in TA No. 1530 of 2015, titled as Jagdish Kumar and others versus State of Himachal Pradesh and others and in TA No. 1813 of 2015, titled as Hardyal Singh Thakur and others versus State of Himachal Pradesh and others ; directing the Petitioner(s)-State of Himachal Pradesh to grant pay scale of Rs 1800-3200 to the Respondents-Employees as Inspector Cooperative Societies w.e.f. 01.01.1986 with all consequential benefits within three months and the orders dated 09.08.2018 passed by Learned Tribunal in OA No. 4726 of 2018, titled as Gulzar Singh Parmar and others versus State of Himachal Pradesh and others, by directing the petitioners-State of Himachal Pradesh to consider the case of the Respondents-Original Applications for granting them the pay scale of Rs 1800-3200 w.e.f 01.01.1986 in view of the orders passed by Learned Tribunal in the case of Jagdish Kumar (supra), subject to verification, in case, the Original Applicants-Employees therein were similarly situated and the aforesaid order has attained finality.

2. Since the factual matrix as well as the issue involved in aforesaid writ petitions is similar therefore, with the consent of Learned Counsel(s) all these matters are taken up for adjudication together.

3. For appreciating the controversy herein, initial facts are taken from CWP No 2531 of 2019, originating from TA No 1530 of 2015, in the case Jagdish Kumar (supra) [referred to as Lead Case-I] and the facts in continuation are taken from CWP No 451 of 2019, originating from TA No 2526 of 2015, in HP State Co-operative Department Non-Gazetted Employees Association and others (supra) [referred to as Lead Case-II].

FACTUAL MATRIX IN CASE OF JAGDISH KUMAR
-LEAD CASE-I:
4. Jagdish Kumar and others, being the Respondents Employees-Original Applicants in Lead Case-I, had filed an Original Application i.e. O.A (D) No. 437 of 2007 before Learned Tribunal and due to its abolition, the aforesaid Original Application stood transferred to this Court and after its re-establishment, the same stood re-transferred to the Tribunal as TA No 1530 of 2015, titled as Jagdish Kumar versus State of Himachal Pradesh, seeking the following reliefs:

(i). That the office order dated 30.08.2007, AnnexureA-7, vide which the representation dated 07.07.2007, Annexure A-6 has been rejected, may kindly be quashed and set-aside in the interest of justice.

(ii). That the respondents may kindly be directed to remove the anomaly in the pay scale of Inspector/Inspector Audit as has been done in the State of Punjab.

(iii). That the respondents may kindly be directed to release to the applicants the pay scale of Rs.1800-3200 in place of Rs.1650-2950 w.e.f. 01.1.1986 or from any subsequent date from which they are entitled for the same with all consequential benefits.

(iv). That the respondent may also be directed to re-fix the pay of the applicants after removing the anomaly in the pay scale and release the arrear with interest @ 15% per annum.

(v). That as all the applicants have been retired on superannuation, the respondents may kindly be directed to re-fix their pension and the arrear of the same may kindly be released with interest @ 15% per annum.

4(i). Respondents Employees-Original Applicants-had set up a case before the erstwhile Tribunal that some of them were initially appointed as Sub-Inspector {later redesignated as Inspector Gr-II} and some were appointed as Clerks between the pe