Municipal Corporation Of Delhi vs Dharam Singh & Another
2009 Latest Caselaw 5155 Del

*              IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+                        W.P. (C.) No.13783/2009

%                      Date of Decision: 11.12.2009

Municipal Corporation of Delhi                          .... Petitioner
                     Through Mr.Sanjeev      Sabharwal,    Standing
                               counsel for MCD with Mr.Alok Singh,
                               Advocate


                                 Versus


Dharam Singh & another                                   .... Respondents
                   Through Nemo.


CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIPIN SANGHI

1.    Whether reporters of Local papers may be                YES
      allowed to see the judgment?
2.    To be referred to the reporter or not?                   NO
3.    Whether the judgment should be reported in               NO
      the Digest?



ANIL KUMAR, J.

*

The petitioner, Municipal Corporation of Delhi, has impugned the

order dated 15th May, 2009 in TA No.230 of 2009, Dharam Singh and

another v. Commissioner, Municipal Corporation of Delhi and TA

No.251 of 2009, Mahinder Singh and others v. Commissioner,

Municipal Corporation of Delhi directing the petitioner to grant to the

respondents the same pay scale which is paid to the Security Guards

who are attached to the Hospitals of the petitioner, and fixing the pay of

the respondents in the scale of Rs.210-250/- with effect from 9th

December, 1985. However, payment of the arrears of the said scale has

been restricted from the actual date of filing of the writ petitions by the

respondents.

The respondents had been appointed as Chowkidars in the pay

scale of Rs.196-232. In 2002 they came to know that Security Guards

and Gunmen who had similar duties, and who were interchangeable

with the Chowkidards but who were attached to the Hospital were

getting higher pay scales. It transpired that Security Guards and

Gunmen in the Departments attached to the Hospitals were granted

higher pay scales pursuant to the resolution dated 17th May, 1985.

The respondents also relied on the orders passed in writ petition

No.1610-18 of 2005 filed by some other Chowkidars claiming parity

with the Security Guards and Gunmen having higher pay scale which

was allowed by the High Court by order dated 20th February, 2006.

Letters patent appeal filed by the petitioner against the said order has

also been dismissed.

The writ petitions filed by the respondents were transferred to the

Tribunal and renumbered as TA No.230/2009 and 251/2009 upon

jurisdiction in respect of service matters of MCD employees being vested

in the Tribunal. The petitioners had contested the transfer applications

on the ground that respondents were appointed pursuant to specific

recruitment rules promulgated on 23rd May, 1974 to the post of

Chowkidars in the pay scale of 70-85 which was revised to Rs.196-232.

It was contended that after almost a decade they cannot contend that

they are entitled to better pay scale and their claim is barred by

limitation. Regarding the judgment of the High court in case of

similarly placed Chowkidars who had also claimed parity with the

Security Guards and Gunmen, the petitioner contended that the High

court had not gone into the details and consequently the benefits which

was granted to Chowkidars who had filed the writ petition cannot be

extended to Chowkidars in the present writ petitions. The relief prayed

by the respondents was also opposed on the ground that the work is

not identical and basic qualification for employment are different.

The petitioner cannot refute that the Chowkidars in the caretaker

departments can be exchanged with the Security Guards and Gunmen

deployed in the hospitals of the petitioner as the jobs are

interchangeable. In the circumstances, the petitioner cannot contend

that their work is not identical on the basis of difference of qualification.

The judgment passed in Writ Petition (Civil) No.1601-18 of 2005 on 20th

February, 2006 cannot be distinguished by the petitioner on the ground

that the High Court had not gone into the details. The Letters patent

appeal filed by the petitioner has already been dismissed and the said

decision has attained finality. Therefore, the Tribunal was justified in

relying on the order of the High court dated 20th February, 2002 and

granting notionally the same pay scale to the respondents which is

granted to the Security Guards and Gunmen of the petitioner who are

attached to the Hospitals. The petitioner has also failed to make out a

case for creating a different class of Chowkidars in the pay scale of

Rs.196-232 vis a vis Security Guards and Gunmen in the pay scale of

Rs.210-250. The resolution of the petitioner dated 17th May, 1985

could not be the sole basis for granting a better pay scale to the

Security Guards and Gunmen in MCD hospitals and not granting the

pay scale of Rs.210-250/- to the Chowkidars in the caretaker

department who had been given a pay scale of Rs.196-232/-. In the

circumstances, the order of the Tribunal cannot be faulted and there

are no grounds to interfere with the same.

Regarding the plea of the limitation for the claims of the

respondent, we find no merit in the petitioners submission as the

arrears have been granted to the respondents from the date of filing of

their respective writ petitions and not from the date notional pay scales

have granted to the respondents. Reference may be made to the

Supreme Court decision in M.R.Gupta v. Union of India, 1995(5) SCC

628. In the circumstances, the Tribunal's order dated 15th May, 2009

does not suffer from any irregularity or illegality which will require

interference by this court in exercise of its jurisdiction under Article 226

of the Constitution of India. The writ petition, in the facts and

circumstances, is without any merit and it is, therefore, dismissed.

ANIL KUMAR, J.

December 11, 2009                                     VIPIN SANGHI, J.
'Dev'