Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
AJAY MOHAN GOEL
Ruchi Ramesh – Appellant
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petition to quash rejection of pay anomaly removal request. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. pay difference justified by phd increments in higher scale. (Para 4) |
| 3. anomaly rectified by stepping up senior's pay per supreme court. (Para 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 4. quash order; direct pay parity and arrears payment. (Para 8) |
JUDGMENT :
Ajay Mohan Goel, J.
By way of this writ petition, the petitioner has, inter alia, prayed for the following relief:-
“i. That Annexure P-6 may be set aside/quashed and the respondents may be ordered to equate the petitioner in the matter of pay with Sh. Gopal Krishan, respondent No.3 and her pay may be fixed accordingly with all consequential benefits from the due date.”
2. The case of the petitioner is that there is a pay anomaly in the pay of the petitioner as compared to Sh. Gopal Krishan, who is her junior and the representation filed by the petitioner for the removal of the said pay anomaly, has been arbitrarily rejected by the respondents, in terms of Annexure P-6. According to the petitioner, the pay anomaly, in the pay of the petitioner as compared to her junior, which is not on account of any omission on the part of the petitioner, has to be removed by the re
Pay anomaly where senior draws less than junior due to advanced increments for Ph.D. at different pay scales must be rectified by stepping up senior's pay from date anomaly arose, per Supreme Court p....
The main legal point established is that a senior cannot be paid lesser salary than the junior, and the department is bound to step up the pay of the senior on par with his junior for the purpose of ....
Point of Law : Reasoning of the High Court was erroneous and the appellant No.1 was also entitled to the same benefits of pay parity with Shri Shori as has been granted to the appellant No.2
Senior cannot be paid lesser salary than his juniors and, in such circumstances, even if, there was difference in incremental benefits in the scale given to the government servant, such anomaly shoul....
The court established that pay anomalies must be corrected retrospectively to uphold the principle of equality under Article 14 of the Constitution.
Pension entitlement is determined by the last drawn salary, and claims of pay anomalies raised without prior substantiation lack merit.
Senior's pay must be stepped up to match junior's in same cadre/identical posts when anomaly arises from FR 22(I)(a)(1) application and pay fixation options, per DOP&T guidelines.
The court emphasized the importance of promptly rectifying pay anomalies and complying with court orders to prevent financial loss to the petitioner.
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
