A writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India can be dismissed on the ground of delay and laches if the petitioner fails to explain an inordinate delay in approaching the court, especially when the claim has become stale and the petitioner has retired long ago.

****

NAMIT KUMAR, J. (ORAL)

1. The petitioners have invoked the writ jurisdiction of this Court under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India, seeking issuance of a writ of certiorari for quashing the order dated 13.06.2017 (Annexure P-7), passed by respondent No.2, whereby the claim of the petitioners for grant of pay scale of Rs.5000-8100 w.e.f. 01.01.1996 has been rejected. Further seeking issuance of a writ of mandamus, directing the respondents to grant the pay scale of Rs.5000-8100 to the petitioners w.e.f. 01.01.1996 along with all consequential benefits as have been granted to the other Junior Assistants.

2. Brief facts of the case, as have been pleaded in the petition, are that the petitioners were initially appointed on the posts of Clerks in the Department of Health and Family Welfare, Punjab on various dates between the years 1980 to 1983. During their service tenure, they were promoted to the posts of Junior Assistants on 01.01.1996 and further to the posts of Senior Assistants and retired as such, on attaining the age of superannuation, between the years 2013 to 2021. On 16.01.1998, 4^th Punjab Pay Commission was introduced to revise the pay scale of Government employees w.e.f. 01.01.1996 and pursuant to that Punjab Civil Services (Revised Pay) Rules, 1998 were notified, vide notification dated 16.01.1998 (Annexure P-2). As per the said pay revision, the pay scale of Junior Assistant was revised from Rs.1500-2700 to Rs.5000-8100 w.e.f. 01.01.1996. Thereafter, vide notification 19.05.1998 (Annexure P-3), respondent No.2 amended the aforesaid rules and notified 'Punjab Civil Service (Revised Pay) (First Amendment) Rules, 1998'. As per the said amendment, the designation and the revised equivalence of the unrevised pay scale of officials working as Senior Clerk and Junior Assistants, as on 01.01.1996, were to be protected as a measure personal to them, whereas the remaining Junior Assistants, appointed after 01.01.1996 were made entitled to the pay scale of Rs.4400-7000. By this revision an anomaly was created in the cadre of Junior Assistants. Subsequently, certain Junior Assistants working in the Department of Irrigation, Punjab filed CWP-22422-2010 titled as ' Anil Kumar and others vs. State of Punjab and others ' seeking protection of pay, that they were drawing as on 01.01.1996. The said petition was allowed by this Court, vide order dated 16.05.2012 (Annexure P-4), which was upheld the Hon'ble Supreme Court. Thereafter, the petitioners herein submitted a representation dated 23.07.2015 (Annexure P-6) to the respondents, seeking protection of their pay w.e.f. 01.01.1996 in view of the decision of this Court in CWP-22422-2010, no action was taken on the same.

Consequently, the petitioners approached this Court by filing CWP-9616-2016 titled as 'Mohan Singh and others Vs. State of Punjab and others' claiming benefit of protection of their pay w.e.f. 01.01.1996, which was disposed of by this Court, vide order dated 17.05.2016, with a direction to the respondents to decide the representation dated 23.07.2015, submitted by the petitioners, within a period of 03 months from the receipt of a certified copy of the order and in case the relief was to be denied, to pass a speaking order and the same be conveyed to the petitioners. Pursuant to the said