WP(C) No.6669/2015

Page 1 of 5

$~8

*

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+

W.P.(C) 6669/2015 and CM No. 12162/2015 (Stay)

Date of Decision : 25^th November, 2016

UNION OF INDIA & ORS.

..... Petitioners

Through

Mr. B. K. Berera, Advocate

versus

HARI SINGH & ORS.

..... Respondents

Through

Mr. A. K. Trivedi and Mr. Ashok K.

Vij, Advocates

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDER SHEKHAR

SANJIV KHANNA, J. (ORAL)

1)

Union of India through the Secretary, Ministry of Defence,

The Engineer in Chief and the Garrison Engineer (I), has filed this

writ petition impugning the order dated 18.03.2015 passed by the

Principal Bench of the Central Administrative Tribunal whereby

O.A. No. 3335/2013 filed by Hari Singh, Murti Devi, Mehar Chand,

Dharam Singh and Mangat Ram has been allowed, directing that they

would be paid arrears from the date of initial appointment/promotion

to the post of Valveman or 16.10.1981, whichever was later.

2) Respondent nos. 1, 3 and 4, namely Hari Singh, Mehar Chand

and Dharam Singh, respectively, retired from the service on attaining

2016:DHC:7656-DB

WP(C) No.6669/2015

Page 2 of 5

the age of superannuation in 2008. Respondent no. 2-Murti Devi is

the wife of Madan Lal who died while serving as a Valveman on

22.09.2011. Respondent no. 5-Mangat Ram superannuated on

30.11.2013.

3) Identical dispute with regard to the pay scale applicable to

Valveman was examined by the Jodhpur Bench of the Central

Administrative Tribunal in O.A. No. 51/2002 titled Tulsa Ram &

Ors. Vs. Union of India & Ors. The said O.A. was allowed vide the

order dated 18.10.2002, directing the respondents, who are the

petitioners before us, to grant pay scale of Rs.260-400/Rs.950-1500

to the applicants from the date of their initial appointment as

Valveman within three months. The direction was challenged by way

of a Special Leave Petition (SLP) which was dismissed. Following

this decision, OAs filed by other Valvemen were allowed by

different benches of the Tribunal.

4)

Counsel for the petitioner however, submits that the

Chandigarh Bench of the Central Administrative Tribunal in O.A.

No. 320/PB/2001 titled Thalakan A. and Ors. Vs. Union of India and

Ors., while accepting the entitlement to pay scale of Rs.260-

400/Rs.950-1500, had applied the law of limitation and had granted

partial relief stating the pay in the said pay scale would be fixed

notionally from 16.10.1981 but actual arrears would be restricted to

the period of 18 months prior to filing the O.A. The writ petition

filed by the Valvemen, challenging the said order, was dismissed by

the High Court of Punjab and Haryana. Similarly the Jammu and

Kashmir High Court in SWP No. 1698/2012 titled The Chief

2016:DHC:7656-DB

WP(C) No.6669/2015

Page 3 of 5

Engineer, Air Force Zone Udampur Vs. Abdul Majid Hayan & Ors.,

vide order dated 18.10.2012, had restricted the benefit to the period

of 18 months prior to filing the O.A. The SLP filed before the

Supreme Court against the order dated 18.10.2012 was dismissed.

5) Learned counsel for the respondents submits that the order

passed by the High Court of Jammu and Kashmir in SWP

No.1698/2012 pertains to Skilled Caneman whereas the order dated

18.10.2002 passed by the Jodhpur Bench of the Tribunal pertains to

Valveman.

6) Learned counsel for the respondents, has urged that the issue

of arrears stands settled and decided vide the earlier order dated

31.03.2008 of O.A. Nos. 2098/2007, 2166/2007 and 2380/2007 filed

by the present respondents. Relevant Portion of the order dated

31.03.2008 of the Tribunal in O.A. Nos. 2098/2007, 2166/2007 and

2380/2007, reads as under:-

“9.

We, therefore, hold that the applicants will be

entitled to the benefit of higher pay scale, recognizing

them as skilled group, but the consequential benefits will

be claimable by them, depending upon the final outcome

of the appeal