O R D E R (FINAL)

JUSTICE RITU TAGORE, MEMBER [JUDL.]

01.The applicant, a retired Class-IV employee, is aggrieved of the action of the respondents whereby, after his retirement on 31.05.2022, his pension has been stepped down and retiral benefits, including gratuity, have been withheld on the ground of alleged excess payment arising out of grant of higher pay scale under SRO-149 of 1973.

02.Through the medium of the present Original Application, the applicant seeks quashing of the impugned order bearing No. MID/Estt/1313-16 dated 20.06.2022, issued by the Executive Engineer, Mechanical Irrigation Division Baramulla (respondent No. 5) (Annexure–I), sofar as it directs stepping down of the pension of the applicant. The applicant further seeks a direction to the respondents to release hispensionary benefits on the basis of the last pay drawn, along with all consequential benefits.

03.Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the Devendra Digitaly signed by Devendra Tripathi applicant was initially engaged as a daily wager on 14.06.1987 and was subsequently regularized as Helper vide Government Order dated 03.09.1996 with effect from 01.04.1995 in terms of policy in vogue at that time. It is submitted that in terms of SRO-149 of 1973, skilled and semi-skilled workers, particularly ITI trained employees, were extended the benefit of higher pay scale. This position, it is contended,continued to be maintained under the Pay Rules of 1987 and 1992.

04. It is furthersubmitted that in terms of Pay rules of 1987, general Helper was held entitled to pay scale of 745-1025 and skilled workers were treated as semi –skilled category and were given pay scale of 900-1830. In the pay Rules of 1992, pay scale of the skilled and semi –skilled helpers was revised to 1200-2040 from 900-1830 and general helpers from 745-1025 to 775-1025.

05.It is further submitted that the applicant, being ITI trained, was granted the benefit of higher pay scale and the said position also stood fortified in terms of judgment dated Devendra Digitaly signed by Devendra Tripathi 12.02.1998 (Annexure –II) passed by the Hon’ble High Court in SWP No. 421/1992, pursuant where to similarly situated employees were extended the benefit of higher pay scale and the applicant was also granted the same.

06.Learned counsel further submits that though certain issues were raised in the year 2007 regarding verification of ITI certificates, the case of the applicant was duly verified and the benefit of higher pay scale was reaffirmed in his favor vide order dated 07.06.2007(Annexure-III) .

07.It is contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that the benefit of higher pay scale had been extended to the applicant for over a decade. However, the respondents abruptly issuedCircular dated 22.02.2008(Annexure IV) directing that such benefits be kept in abeyance which resulted in a round of litigation between the parties. Ultimately, the applicant’s claim came to be rejected by the department vide the impugned order on the ground that the matter is subjudice before the Hon’ble Supreme Court. Devendra Digitaly signed by Devendra Tripathi

08.Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the SLP preferred by the respondents, which was cited as pending while rejecting the applicant’s claim, has since been dismissed. In view thereof, it is argued that the ground taken in the impugned order, namely the pendency of the SLP, no longer survives and is not available to the respondents. In support of the aforesaid submission, learned counsel has relied upon the order dated 04.02.2026 passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in The State of J&K &Ors. vs. Provincial Power Employees Union &Ors., Civil Appeal No(s). 7992 of 2022, whereby the Special Leave Petition filed by the State of J&K challenging the judgment of the Hon’ble High Court came to be dismissed.

09.It is further submitted that after retirement of the applicant on 31.05.2022, the respondents have sought to withdraw the said benefit and effect r