The Himachal Pradesh High Court allowed a petition, praying that the stipulation that the pay scale of Rs.1640-2925/- would be admissible to those Shastris only who were working on a regular basis on 23.3.1989 may be struck down being in violation of Statutory R&P Rules and consequently petitioner may be held entitled to the pay scale of Rs.1640-2925 as already granted to him with all consequential benefits. The Court observed that prior to 23.03.1989, individuals who did not have a higher educational qualification, i.e., B.Ed., were granted a higher pay scale.
Brief Facts:
On the recommendations of the Himachal Pradesh Public Service Commission, the petitioner was offered an appointment to the post of Shastri on a regular basis on 01.09.1989. In pursuance to the aforesaid, the petitioner joined in the pay scale of Rs.1640-2925/- on 06.09.1989. At the time when the petitioner had joined service, the Recruitment and Promotion Rules applicable to the post of Shastris were those which were notified on 24.04.1986. A perusal of the same categorically reflects that the essential qualification for the post of Shastri was, “Shastri from a recognized University/Institution”. The grievance of the petitioner emanates from a letter dated 04.09.2006 (Annexure A-5), whereby, respondent No.3 had pointed out that the pay scale of Rs.1640-2925 granted to the petitioner on his appointment as Shastri was not admissible to him and that the petitioner was entitled to pay scale of Rs.1500-2640.
Contentions of the Petitioner:
The Learned Counsel for the Petitioner submitted that the pay scales in the case at hand have been granted for discharging similar duties, merely on the basis of their date of appointment.
Contentions of the Respondent:
The Learned Counsel for the Respondent submitted that the State of Himachal Pradesh generally follows the pattern of the Punjab Government for the purpose of pay scales. According to the learned Additional Advocate General, the petitioner has been given a pay scale as his counterparts in Punjab. Other than the aforesaid, learned Additional Advocate General has argued that their act of granting a higher pay scale is permissible as they have prescribed a higher pay scale for a higher qualification.
Observations of the Court:
The Court noted that a pay scale has been granted merely on the basis of the date of appointment.
The Court observed that the explanation offered by the respondents-State, based on following the Punjab pattern as granted to their counterparts in Punjab cannot be justified to grant two pay scales merely on the basis of different dates of appointment. Other than the aforesaid, a grant of a higher pay scale based on educational qualification would have been justified if persons appointed prior to 23.03.1989 would also have been granted a higher pay scale based on educational qualification. However, in the case at hand, prior to 23.03.1989, individuals who did not have a higher educational qualification, i.e., B.Ed., were granted a higher pay scale. Therefore, in the case at hand, the petitioner must succeed on the principle of “equal pay for equal work”.
The decision of the Court:
The Himachal Pradesh High Court, allowing the petition, held that the petitioner is entitled to the pay scale of Rs.1640-2925/- with all consequential benefits subsequent thereto.
Case Title: Narayan Dutt v State of H.P. & Ors.
Coram: Hon’ble Justice Bipin Chander Negi
Case no.: CWPOA No.208 of 2019
Advocate for the Petitioner: Mr. Dilip Sharma
Advocate for the Respondents: Mr. Anup Rattan
Read Judgment @LatestLaws.com
Picture Source :
