JUDGMENT :

SHAHZAD AZEEM, J.

01. The Appellants have thrown challenge to the Order dated July 24, 2024 passed by the learned Single Judge [“the Writ Court”] in WP (C) No. 1261/2023 titled ‘Farooq Ahmad Zargar v. UT of J&K and Ors.’ whereby the Writ Court directed the Principal Accountant General to authorize the pension as well as post-retiral benefits to the Respondent No.1 in accordance with pay fixed in his favour by his parent Department.

02. The central issue in the present appeal concerns the grant of benefit of SRO 149 of 1973. Before the Writ Court, the Appellants- Respondents had taken a position that the issue involved in the matter was pending consideration before the Hon’ble Supreme Cout. It is not in dispute that during the pendency of the present appeal, the Apex Court has now adjudicated upon the said issue. The controversy, therefore, stands settled and the present appeal is required to be decided in terms of the Order passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court. In view of this development, we do not propose to burden this Judgment with an elaborate discussion of all the factual and legal pleas raised by the parties and shall delineate only those facts which are necessary for the present appeal.

03. Succinctly stated, the Respondent No.1, in December, 1977, initially came to be engaged as PDL/ TDL (Permanent Daily Labour/ Temporary Daily Labour) in the Power Development Department. Upon completion of more than eight years of service, the Respondent No.1 was regularized as Helper in the pay scale of Rs. 345–460 vide Order No. DC/PD/Budget/V/203 of 1985 dated October 28, 985 issued by the Development Commissioner, Power. The Respondent No.1 possessed ITI qualification in Electrician trade and, in view of the said qualification, his pay scale was temporarily upgraded to Rs. 1150–2050 vide Order No. CE/M&RE/61 of 1991 dated August 13, 1991 with effect from April 25, 1990, subject to the final outcome of the proceedings pending before the High Court. Subsequently, the benefit of the revised grade Rs. 1400–2600 was stopped in terms of Circular No. PDD/VI/ITI/90 dated April 08, 1992 for the period from May, 1992 to May, 1993. Thereafter, the Respondent No.1 superannuated from service on February 28, 2023, after rendering long years of service in the Department and, as such, his pension case was thereafter forwarded by the Pay and Accounts Officer, JKPCL, Srinagar to the office of the Accountant General, J&K for settlement of pensionary benefits. The office of the Principal Accountant General (A&E), J&K returned the pension case with the observation that the pay of the Respondent No.1 was required to be re-fixed after excluding the benefit of SRO 149 of 1973, on the ground that the issue regarding grant of such benefit was stated to be pending consideration before the Hon’ble Supreme Court.

04. The Appellants contend that since the Respondent No.1 had availed the benefit of SRO 149 of 1973 under the cover of Government Order No. 309-PDD of 1995 dated August 30, 1995, despite the fact that he was not a party to the litigation concerning SRO 149. According to the Appellants, upon consideration of representations and examination of the legal position, the Department concluded that SRO 149 of 1973 stood superseded by subsequent pay revision rules, including SRO 91 of 1982, SRO 370 of 1987 and SRO 75 of 1992, thereby rendering the provisions of SRO 149 inoperative. It is further contended that SRO 381 of 1981, by virtue of its repealing clause, repealed all earlier rules inconsistent with the Recruitment Rules framed in 1981, thereby nullifying the effect of SRO149 of 1973. The appellants also submit that Government Order No. 309-PDD of 1995 was intended only as a one-time special dispensation for certain in- service employees, who had obtained ITI qualification between July 01, 1972 and August 31, 1981 and who were already drawing the said benefit. It is alleged that the Respondent No.1 neither applied for the benefit under SRO 149 no