Back
2020 Supreme(P&H) 649
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Rakesh Kumar Jain, Arun Kumar Tyagi, JJ.
Punjab and Haryana High Court and another - Petitioners
Versus
Basdev Bansal - Respondent
LPA No.1100 of 2019 (O&M) in CWP No.23260 of 2017
Decided On : 06-03-2020
For the Appellants :Ms. Deepali Puri, Advocate
For the Respondent:Mr. R.Kartikeya, Advocate
The main legal point established is that in service matters, the entitlement to arrears of pay from the date of notional upgradation is not barred by limitation, as it arises from a continuing wrong of incorrect pay fixation.
Headnote:
Stepping Up of Pay - Service Matter - Punjab Civil Services (Revised Pay) Rules, 2009, High Court Establishment (Appointment and Conditions of Service) Rules, 1973 - The judgment discusses the stepping up of pay of a senior employee to maintain parity with his junior, as well as the entitlement to arrears of pay from the date of notional upgradation. The court considered the constitutional principle of equal pay for equal work, relevant rules and instructions, and administrative precedents to decide in favor of the petitioner.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, a Clerk in the High Court, sought stepping up of his pay with his junior employee and grant of ACP benefits. The respondents declined his request, leading to the filing of a civil writ petition. The Single Bench partly allowed the petition, directing the payment of arrears to the petitioner. The respondents filed a Letters Patent Appeal against this decision.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the petitioner's claim for stepping up of pay was valid and not barred by limitation. It held that the petitioner was entitled to arrears of pay from the date of notional upgradation, as per relevant rules and instructions.
Issues: The issues involved the stepping up of pay, entitlement to arrears of pay, and the application of relevant rules and instructions in service matters.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the petitioner's claim for stepping up of pay and entitlement to arrears of pay from the date of notional upgradation was valid and not barred by limitation, based on the recurring cause of action arising from the continuing wrong of incorrect pay fixation.
Final Decision: The Letters Patent Appeal was dismissed, and the respondents were directed to calculate and disburse the arrears of pay to the petitioner within three months.
JUDGMENT :
Arun Kumar Tyagi, J.
The appellants have filed the present Letters Patent Appeal under Clause X of the Letters Patent Act for setting aside the impugned judgment dated 13.12.2018 passed by the Hon’ble Single Bench of this Court in CWP No.23260 of 2017 titled as ‘Basdev Bansal Vs. Punjab and Haryana High Court and another’.
2. Briefly stated the facts giving rise to filing of the present appeal are that the petitioner was appointed as a Clerk on 03.05.1991 to serve on the establishment of this Court. He was promoted as Special Secretary on 14.05.2013. When the petitioner applied for 10 days earned leave encashment in October, 2016 for the purpose of availing leave travel concession, the petitioner came to know that he was drawing less salary than his junior Sh. Arun Kumar Jain. The petitioner made representation dated 22.10.2016 which was allowed by respondent No.1 vide order dated 09.12.2016 whereby the pay of the petitioner was stepped up at par with his junior Sh. Arun Kumar Jain w.e.f. 30/05/2014. However, the grant of actual financial benefits from such step up was limited w.e.f. 05.12.2016. The petitioner made representation dated 15.12.2016 requesting for grant of actual financial benefits from 30.05.2014 to 04.12.2016. His representation was declined by the respondents vide order dated 08.02.2017 on the ground that his claim was not covered under the rules/instructions as well as policy framed by this Court in such like matters. The petitioner submitted request letter dated 13.04.2017 for providing the necessary guidelines with respect to stepping up of pay and in response thereto received communication dated 17.05.2017 along with copies of the rules and instructions but to him the same did not disclose any plausible reason in support of impugned order dated 08.02.2017. Thereafter the petitioner agitated his claim for grant of ACP benefit due in the month of May 2017 on completion of 4 years of service which was declined vide order dated 07.09.2017 with the remarks that he will get the benefit of ACP w.e.f. 30.05.2018 i.e. on completion of 4 years from the date of step up with Sh. Arun Kumar Jan, Special Secretary (Readers’ Line). Feeling aggrieved, the petitioner filed above-said civil writ petition before this Court seeking quashing of impugned orders dated 09.12.2016, 08.02.2017 and 07.09.2017 and grant of actual financial benefit of step up of his pay with effect from 30.05.2014 and grant of ACP on completion of 4 years of service with effect from 14.05.2017.
3. The writ petition was opposed by the respondents in terms of reply filed by them. In their reply the respondents pleaded that the petitioner was appointed as Reader w.e.f. 10.12.2007 and was promoted as Special Secretary w.e.f. 14.05.2013 before completing 4 years service as court secretary and the benefit of ACP on completion of 4 years of service in the cadre of court secretary was not drawn by him whereas Sh. Arun Kumar Jain was appointed as Reader w.e.f. 17.12.2007 and was promoted as Special Secretary w.e.f. 30.05.2014 after getting the benefit of ACP on completion of 4 years of service in the cadre of Court Secretary on 12.01.2014 and he started drawing higher pay with effect from 30.05.2014 on account of fixation of pay on promotion as Special Secretary. The anomaly in the pay of the petitioner and junior employee w.e.f. 30.05.2014 on account of fixation of pay of junior employee is directly as a result of application of the provisions of rule 11-A of the Punjab Civil Services (Revised Pay) Rules, 2009 (for short ‘2009 Rules’).The petitioner made representation dated 22.10.2016 which was considered and vide order dated 09.12.2016 the pay of the petitioner was stepped up at par with his junior Sh. Arun Kumar Jain w.e.f. 30.05.2014 but the grant of actual financial benefits from such step up was limited w.e.f. 05.12.2016 on parity with Sh. Narinder Singh, Superintendent Grade-1 whose pay was stepped with his junior w.e.f. 30.07.2008 only on notio
