IMPORTANT POINT
Principle of stepping up of the pay is inapplicable to the situation where a junior person on transfer to a different place is being paid extra payment by way of special pay or overtime pay as it would not be a ground for other seniors to claim parity of pay by stepping up of their scale of pay.

ORDER

Leave granted. We have heard learned counsel on both sides.

2. These appeals by special leave arise from the impugned order, made on February 2, 1993 by the Calcutta High Court followed by contempt petition, clarification petition etc. of Calcutta High Court.

3. The admitted position is that the respondents, viz., Tapan Kumar Paul and others, Sujit Baran Mukherjee and others and one Shankar Bose, all wee initially appointed as Junior Copyists on May 12, 1969. Their inter se seniority was determined on the basis of their respective date of birth. Subsequently, Shankar Bose was transferred to the Secretariat Department whereat he had to discharge arduous duty for which he was paid special pay of Rs. 50/- per month. Consequent upon revision of the pay scales effected in 1981, the pay of the respondents and others came to be revised. The special pay paid to Shankar Bose got merged with his pay in the revised pay scales. Consequently, he started drawing higher pay than Tapan Paul, Sujit Baran Mukherjee and others. Tapan Paul and others filed writ petition in the High Court seeking upgradation of their scale of pay so as to be on par with that of Shankar Bose. The writ petition was allowed by the High Court and the Corporation was directed to step up the pay of Tapan Paul and others so as to be on par with that of Shankar Bose. Subsequently, a petition for contempt was filed by Tapan Paul and others for non-compliance of the directions issued by the High Court. The appellants filed an application for clarification. In the meanwhile, an order had come to be passed at the instance of Sujit Baran Mukherjee and others on April 23, 1993; when it was realised that Regulation 34-A of the Calcutta Municipal Corporation regulations (for short, the Regulations ) did not apply to stepping up of the scale of pay, the order passed for stepping up of their scale of pay of T.K. Paul and others was withdrawn which also came to be challenged. The order dismissing the contempt petition was passed, directions to keep that amount in account pending writ petition filed by the Sujit Mukherjee and others were issued and consequential application for clarification came to be dismissed in the impugned orders. Thus, these appeals by special leave.

4. It is not in dispute that Shankar Bose was given a special pay; in other words, overtime pay for doing work outside the normal duties at a sum of Rs. 50/- per month and after the revision of the pay scales, the special pay of Rs. 50/- came to be merged in his pay. Nonetheless, it must be treated to be a special pay given to him since he had the onerous duty to be discharged outside the normal duty assigned to the post. The question is: whether Tapan Paul, Sujit Baran Mukherjee and others who came to be appointed on the same day are entitled to have their pay scales stepped up so as to on par with Shankar Bose? It is contended for the respondents that when such a relief was granted and was granted and was allowed to become final, it would not be open to the respondents to withdraw the same. We find no force in the contention.

Regulation 34-A postulates thus :

"If an employee on his promotion to a higher post draws pay at a higher rate than his senior employee due to fixation of his pay in the higher post under the normal rules, of due to revision of pay scales, the pay of the employee senior to him shall be fixed at the same stage and from the same date his junior draws the higher rate of pay irrespective of whether the lien in the lower post held buy the senior employee is terminated at the time of refixation of pay subject to the conditions that both the senior and junior employee belong to the same cadre and same pay scale of the post in which they have been promoted are also identical.

The benefit of this Regulation shall not be admissible in case where junior employee exercises his option to retain unrevised scale to pay."

5. A reading thereof would clearly indicate that the principle of stepping up of the