Municipal Corporation Of Delhi vs Shri Abid Ali (Carpenter)
2009 Latest Caselaw 3544 Del

*           IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+                       W.P.(C.) No. 11378/2009

%                 Date of Decision: 03rd September, 2009


# MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHI
                                                          ..... PETITIONER

!                 Through: Mr. Nalin Tripathi, Advocate.

                                 VERSUS

$ SH. ABID ALI (CARPENTER)
                                                        .....RESPONDENT

^                 Through:    Nemo.

CORAM:
Hon'ble MR. JUSTICE S.N. AGGARWAL

1. Whether reporters of Local paper may be allowed to see the judgment? YES

2. To be referred to the reporter or not?YES

3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?YES

S.N.AGGARWAL, J (ORAL) The Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD) in this writ petition seeks

to challenge an industrial award dated 16.10.2006 passed by the

Industrial Adjudicator holding the respondent entitled to the pay scale of

Rs. 260-400 as revised from time to time from the date of his

regularisation.

2. Heard on admission.

3. Briefly stated the facts of the case relevant for the disposal of the

present writ petition are that the respondent was appointed as Carpenter

on muster roll basis with the petitioner in 1973. He was regularised as

Carpenter w.e.f. 01.04.1980. The petitioner at the time of his

regularisation did not grant him the pay scale of Rs. 260-400 approved

for the post of Carpenter and placed him in the pay scale of Rs. 210-270.

Aggrieved therefrom the petitioner raised an industrial dispute which was

referred by the appropriate Government for adjudication to the Labour

Court. The Labour Court, after considering the evidence of the parties

and the documents produced by them before it, reached to a conclusion

that the respondent was entitled to the pay scale of Rs. 260-400 as

revised from time to time from the date of his regularisation because the

petitioner had granted the same pay scale of Rs. 260-400 to the other

two Carpenters, namely, Shri Mohd. Yasin and Shri Puran Singh pursuant

to industrial award in their favour.

4. Mr. Nalin Tripathi has argued that the post of Carpenter in the MCD

at the time respondent was regularised was in the pay scale of Rs. 210-

270 and according to him, he was rightly regularised in the said pay scale

w.e.f. 01.04.1980. Mr. Tripathi has submitted that the scale of Rs. 260-

400 at the relevant time was applicable to the Senior Carpenter, which

according to him, was a promotional post. He has drawn attention of this

Court to the Recruitment Rules for the post of Senior Carpenter which are

at pages 12-13 of the Paper Book. Mr. Tripathi, relying on the

Recruitment Rules for the post of Senior Carpenter, submits that the

respondent has already been promoted to the post of Senior Carpenter

and has been granted the pay scale of Rs. 260-400. No such fact has

been placed by the petitioner on record about the promotion of the

respondent as Senior Carpenter and as to on which date he was granted

said promotion. This fact was not placed by the petitioner even before

the Labour Court. The Court below has relied upon the cases of Shri

Mohd. Yasin and Shri Puran Singh who both are working as Carpenters

with the petitioner and have been granted benefit of higher pay scale of

Rs. 260-400 pursuant to industrial award given in their favour by the

Industrial Adjudicator. Admittedly Shri Mohd. Yasin and Shri Puran Singh

are not Senior Carpenters. Since the petitioner has granted the same

pay scale of Rs. 260-400 to the other two Carpenters, namely, Shri Mohd.

Yasin and Shri Puran Singh, the petitioner cannot treat the respondent

discriminately as it will amount to treating the similarly situated persons

with inequality in the matter of their pay. The reliance on the

Recruitment Rules placed by the petitioner is of no legal consequence

because nothing was placed by the petitioner before the Labour Court as

to when the Recruitment Rules for the post of Senior Carpenter were

made and till what date it remained in existence. In the absence of the

same, the petitioner cannot take any advantage of the Recruitment Rules

for the post of Senior Carpenter which may be existing at the time the

petitioner was regularised, i.e., on 01.04.1980. Be that as it may, this

Court does not find any perversity or illegality in the impugned award

because the said award is based upon higher pay scale of Rs. 260-400

having already been granted by the petitioner to the other two

Carpenters, namely, Shri Mohd. Yasin and Shri Puran Singh.

5. In view of the above, I do not find any merit in this writ petition

which fails and is hereby dismissed in limine. The stay application is also

dismissed.

SEPTEMBER 03, 2009                             S.N.AGGARWAL, J
'bsr'