SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2022 Supreme(Megh) 257

HIGH COURT OF MEGHALAYA AT SHILLONG
W. Diengdoh, J.
Nd AR-272a Shri. Ganesh Kumar - Appellant
Versus
Union of India & Ors. - Respondents
WP(C) No. 74 of 2020
Decided On : 07-07-2022

Advocates appeared:
Mr. M. Chanda, Advocate, for the Petitioner; Mr. R. Debnath, CGC, for the Respondent

IMPORTANT POINT
The main legal point established in the judgment is that entitlement to arrear pay and allowances should be considered on a case-to-case basis, and the principle of 'no work no pay' may not be applicable in cases where the individual was directed to be promoted notionally by judicial pronouncements.

Headnote:

Arrear Pay and Allowances - Promotion Dispute - CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972 - [WP(C) No. 232 of 2013] - [CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972] - The court discussed the petitioner's claim for promotion and consequential benefits, notional promotion, and fixing of seniority, and the requirement of arrear pay and allowances. The key legal provisions discussed include the principle of 'no work no pay' and the application of judicial pronouncements in determining entitlement to arrear pay and allowances.

Fact of the Case:

The petitioner, a Rifleman in Assam Rifles, was selected for promotion as Assistant Commandant but was not promoted due to a departmental proceeding. After multiple litigations, the court directed notional promotion and re-fixation of pay. The petitioner sought arrear pay and allowances from the date of notional promotion.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the petitioner was entitled to arrear pay and allowances from the date of notional promotion as directed by the court, despite the principle of 'no work no pay' being raised by the respondents.

Issues: The main issue was whether the petitioner was entitled to arrears of pay and allowances from the date of notional promotion as Assistant Commandant, despite not physically assuming the role during the relevant period.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the principle of 'no work no pay' would not be applicable to the petitioner's case as he was directed to be promoted notionally by a series of judicial pronouncements. The court emphasized that entitlement to arrear pay and allowances should be considered on a case-to-case basis.

Final Decision: The court allowed the petitioner's claim for arrear pay and allowances and directed the respondent authority to issue necessary orders in this regard within two months.

JUDGMENT

1. This Court vide order dated 01.02.2018 in WP(C) No. 232 of 2013, between the same parties herein indicating that in the third round of litigation between the same parties on the petitioner's claim for promotion and consequential benefits, in the operative part of the order has held as follows:-

    'This Court is clearly of the view that in the given set of facts and circumstances and particularly in view of the concluded findings in the case of the petitioner, the requirement of notional promotion and fixing of seniority carried inherently the requirement of fixation of scale pay of the petitioner w.e.f. 22.01.1997 and for further fixation of pay on notional basis after placement in appropriate scale as applicable at the relevant point of time in all the cadres of progression. For what has been discussed hereinabove, this writ petition is allowed in terms of the relief prayed for. The respondents shall carry out the corresponding modifications and take all necessary corrective steps at the earliest, preferably within 60 days from today.'

    2. Pursuant to the said order, the respondent No. 2 through his assign, has issued a speaking order dated 28.08.2018 indicating thereto that the pay of the petitioner has been fixed at Rs.8,000/- in the pay scale of Rs. 8,000/- 275-13,5000/- per month w.e.f. 22-01-1997 (date of appointment of the batchmates) on notional basis and corresponding re-fixation in the rank of Dy. Comdt (Rs. 10,000-325-15,200/-) on 01-04-2004, in the rank of 2IC (Rs. 31,420/- plus Grade pay Rs. 7,600/-) on 01-07-2008 and in the rank of Comdt. (Rs. 37,400/- plus Grade pay Rs. 8,700/-) on 11-03-2013, have also been done. After detailed work out, it has been found that there is no difference in pay of the officer and his pension has been calculated correctly based on his last pay (Rs.1,34,500/-) drawn. All his pensionary benefits have already been assessed/granted to him as per CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972 and PPO (Pension Payment Order) No. 234981807077 dated 18-05-2018 has been issued in his favour.

    3. It now appears that in this fourth round of litigation, the petitioner has once again approached this Court by way of this instant writ petition with a prayer to direct the respondents to pay the arrear pay and allowances with effect from 22.01.1997 till 31.12.2005 correspondingly in the scale of pay due and payable to the Assistant Commandant with effect from 22.01.1997 to 31.03.2004, and as Deputy Commandant from 01.04.2004 to 31.06.2008 and again as Commandant from 01.07.2008 to 11.03.2013, since the same has not been paid to him and also, since the speaking order dated 28.08.2018 has failed to address the issue of arrear pay and allowance due and payable to the petitioner.

    4. The brief background of the case between the parties, is that the petitioner was enrolled as Rifleman in Assam Rifles on 31.10.1977. In 1996 he was selected by the Departmental Promotion Committee (DPC) as Assistant Commandant and was accordingly sent for training and on completion of the same, had waited for the piping ceremony, but when the said piping ceremony was held, seven of his batch-mates were selected while he was not selected nor promoted on account of a departmental proceeding against him.

    5. The petitioner then approached this Court (the then Shillong Bench of the Gauhati High Court) by way of a writ petition being WP(C) No. 209 (SH) 2001 and vide order dated 07.04.2003, his prayer was allowed. The petitioner was then granted promotion to the post of Assistant Commandant w.e.f. 01.08.2006. Again, this Court was approached by the petitioner by filing a writ petition being WP(C) No. 312 (SH) 2006 and vide order dated 23.03.2010, this Court directed that the petitioner be given notional promotion in the cadre of Assistant Commandant from the date of promotion of his batch-mates i.e. 22.01.1997. The authorities by relevant order ha

          Click Here to Read the rest of this document
          1
          2
          3
          4
          5
          6
          7
          8
          9
          10
          11
          SupremeToday Portrait Ad
          supreme today icon
          logo-black

          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

          qr

          Scan Me!

          India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

          For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

          whatsapp-icon Back to top