* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ LPA No.273 of 2009 & C.M. No.8267/2009
SHRI SATYAPAL TYAGI ..... Appellant
Through: Mr. D.K. Garg & Dr. Bheem
Pratap Singh, Advocates.
Versus
GOVERNMENT OF INDIA & ORS. ..... Respondents
Through: None.
CORAM:
HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NEERAJ KISHAN KAUL
ORDER
% 29.05.2009
1. The present appeal arises out of the judgment of the learned single Judge dated 1st July, 2008.
2. The appellants (original petitioners in the writ petition) had prayed for a direction in the nature of a writ of mandamus for granting them pay scales as recommended by the Fourth Pay Commission as well as the Departmental Anomalies Committee. The appellant had primarily sought four reliefs i.e. (a) directions for granting the pay scale as applicable to the Research Analysts on the basis of recommendations made by the Fourth Pay Commission and the Departmental Anomalies Committee constituted under the Chairmanship of Dr. Gangadhar Jha; (b) directions for grant of entire arrears of revised pay scales w.e.f. 1.1.1986; (c) to grant same pay scale to the petitioner No.3 as to the Accounts and Administrative Officer with the right to recover the amount as paid in excess to the LPA No.273/2009 Page No.1 of 4 Accounts and Administrative Officer and (d) to grant promotion to petitioner No.3 to further higher post.
3. The learned single Judge after considering the rival contentions in detail rightly came to the conclusion that the Central Government, at no stage, had considered the recommendations made by the Anomalies Committee headed by Dr. Gangadhar Jha and the stand taken about the recommendations made by this Committee having become insignificant as in the meantime, recommendations of the Pay Commission came into being for their implementation, was not at all convincing. The Anomalies Committee was constituted by the respondent National Institute of Urban Affairs (in short 'NIUA') itself to prepare a comprehensive report regarding existing anomalies and proper structure of pay scales to be adopted by the NIUA. The said Committee had gone into various aspects of anomalies as it existed then in the pay structure of NIUA in comparison with those of other similar Autonomous Bodies including the Central Government pay structure and thereafter made certain recommendations. This Anomalies Committee had recommended and suggested pay scale of Research Analyst at Rs. 1640-2900, which was found existing in various Government offices and Autonomous Research Institutes for the said post.
4. The learned single Judge correctly held that these recommendations were implemented w.e.f. 1st January, 1986 in general and in case of NIUA employees w.e.f. 1st April, 1987 but the Anomalies Committee gave its report in the year 1992. This, the LPA No.273/2009 Page No.2 of 4 learned single Judge has held, would clearly mean that at the time of fixation of the pay scales of the employees of NIUA including the Research Analyst, the report of the said Anomalies Committee was not before the Central Government. The learned single Judge thus rightly observed that once NIUA found certain anomalies under the pay structure of the NIUA employees vis-à-vis other Government Autonomous Bodies and Government employees then when the said Anomalies Committee made certain suggestions to rectify the said anomalies, the better course for the Central Government was to at least examine the said recommendations made by the Anomalies Committee instead of completely ignoring the same thus making the recommendations redundant. The learned single Judge, in our view, correctly directed the matter to be remitted back to the respondents for reconsideration of the matter afresh after properly examining and evaluating the recommendations made by the Anomalies Committee in its report dated 14th December, 1992. The respondents were directed to take their decision within a period of two months from the date of the order of the learned single Judge.
5. The appellant had also filed a Contempt Case No. 150 of 2009 alleging willful disobedience of the order of this Court dated 1 st July, 2009. The appellant contended in the contempt petition that by virtue of a fresh order dated 19th September, 2008, respondent NIUA had reiterated their decision without considering the report of the Anomalies Committee. The learned single Judge observed in his order disposing of the contempt petition that pursuant to the judgment dated 1st July, 2008, passed by this Court, the respondents LPA No.273/2009 Page No.3 of 4 had set up a Committee which in turn had examined the report of the Anomalies Committee. The Government of India Ministry of Urban Development had requested the NIUA to reconsider the matter afresh by constituting a Committee. In pursuance to the same, NIUA had set up a Committee to examine the matter afresh in accordance with the directions issued by this Court. On 19th September, 2008, the said Committee concluded that the stand of the NIUA remained the same, as according to it, the pay scale could not be changed unless the Ministry agreed to reconsider its case. The learned Judge thus concluded that the respondents had in compliance with the Court's judgment dated 1st July, 2008 considered the report of the Anomalies Committee and no contempt had been committed by the respondents. The learned Judge thus while disposing of the contempt petition also granted the liberty to the appellant to challenge the decision of the NIUA dated 19th September, 2008 in accordance with law.
6. We see no infirmity in the order and directions of the learned single Judge to warrant any interference by us. The appeal is accordingly dismissed. The pending application stands disposed of as well.
CHIEF JUSTICE NEERAJ KISHAN KAUL, J.
MAY 29, 2009 sb LPA No.273/2009 Page No.4 of 4