The main legal point established is that equals cannot be treated unequally, and seniority should prevail in correcting pay discrepancies, as per the principles of general service jurisprudence and Article 14 of the Constitution of India.

JUDGMENT

Arun Monga, J. - Present petition has been filed seeking issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned order dated 11.09.2015 (Annexure P-7). A further prayer has been made for issuing a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to step up the pay of the petitioner at par with his junior w.e.f. 01.12.2000 with all consequential benefits and arrears with interest @18% per annum.

2. The petitioner was appointed as Sub Divisional Officer (Civil) on regular basis w.e.f. 01.02.1989 in the Agricultural Board by promotion. Whereas, his junior Sh. Laxman Dass joined on 08.11.1989 on the same very post by direct recruitment. After implementation of the pay scales vide Haryana Civil Services (Assured Career Progression) Rules, 1998 w.e.f. 01.01.1996, Sh. Laxman Dass, was granted the benefit of 2nd ACP scale of Rs. 12,000-16,500/- w.e.f. 01.12.2000 on completion of his 11 years service with all arrears of salary vide order dated 11.11.2013 (Annexure P-2). However, petitioner was not given the said benefit on the ground that he was not appointed by direct recruitment rather appointed by way of promotion.

3. Being aggrieved by non grant of benefit of 2nd ACP, petitioner submitted a representation on 09.12.2013 (Annexure P- 3) followed by another representation dated 28.02.2014 (Annexure P-4). The petitioner relied on the Instructions dated 02.06.2008 (Annexure P-5) issued by Principal Secretary, Finance but the department did not respond to the same. The said policy/Instructions envisage that salary of senior employee shall be stepped up in the event of a junior employee is getting more salary owing to the ACP.

4. The petitioner then approached this Court by way of Civil Writ Petition No.18926 of 2014 which was disposed of vide order dated 11.09.2014. A direction was given to the respondents to decide the representation of the petitioner within a period of two months. Pursuant thereto, respondent No.2 rejected the claim of the petitioner vide impugned order dated 11.09.2015 (Annexure P-7). Benefit of 2nd ACP has been denied on the ground that the ACP scale granted only to directly recruited SDE/Engineers by the Government and petitioner is a promottee officer. Per impugned order, the Instructions dated 02.06.2008 are not applicable on Group 'A' post, so the case of the petitioner is not covered by these Instructions. Contention of the petitioner regarding stepping up of his salary in view of the judgment passed by this Court in CWP No.7435 of 2010 titled as R.K.Aggarwal vs. State of Haryana was turned down on the ground that the case pertained to Home Department and the duties and responsibilities of the Home Department are different. The two departments are not identical and therefore the said judgment was held to be not applicable.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the petitioner is entitled for grant of ACP pay scales w.e.f. 01.02.2000 on completion of 11 years of service. Worst case, w.e.f. 01.12.2000, when his junior was granted the benefit of ACP scales but the same has been declined by the respondent on flimsy grounds.

6. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents contends that the petitioner being a promotee officer is not entitled to the ACP benefit sought by him ACP scales are permissible to only member of the cadre who are direct recruits/fresh entrants. The case of the petitioner is not covered by the ACP Rules and therefore, he is not entitled to grant of ACP Scale. Accordingly, the Department has rightly rejected the claim of the petitioner. As regards stepping up of pay of the petitioner at par with his junior, the instructions dated 02.06.2008 (Annexure P-5) are applicable to those who are promoted from Group 'D' to Group 'C' and/or Group 'C' to Group 'B' from the date when the juniors were given benefit of ACP scale. It was to be allowed to a senior employee who is getting lesser pay than his junior in the same cadre/post. In such a case, his pay shall b