Delhi High Court
Civil And Sessions Court, ... vs The District And Sessions Judge on 9 July, 2015
Author: G. S. Sistani
$~10 - 13
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ W.P.(C) 4964/2011
NARESH KUMAR AND ORS. ..... Petitioner
Through : Mr. P. S. Bindra, Mr. Shweta
Priyadarshani, Advocates
Versus
THE DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE,
TIS HAZARI COURTS, DELHI AND ORS. ......Respondents
Through : Mr. Santosh K. Tripathi, ASG, GNCTD
Mr. Sanjay Dewan, Advocate for R-1.
Mr. Jasmeet Singh, CGSC.
Mr. Chetan Lokur, Mr. Viraj R. Datar
and Mr. Karan Mehta, Advocates.
$-11
+ W.P.(C) 5392/2011
CIVIL AND SESSIONS COURT
STENOGRAPHERS ASSOCIATION (REGD) ..... Petitioners
Through : Mr. P. S. Bindra, Mr. Shweta
Priyadarshani, Advocates
Ms. S. Janani, Advocate.
versus
THE DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE ..... Respondents
Through : Mr. Santosh K. Tripathi, ASG, GNCTD
Mr. Sanjay Dewan, Advocate for R-1.
Mr. Chetan Lokur, Mr. Viraj R. Datar
and Mr. Karan Mehta, Advocates.
Mr. Abhay Prakash Sahay, Advocate,
CGSE for UOI.
$-12
+ W.P.(C) 5085/2011
ASHOK KANOJIA & ORS. ..... Petitioner
Through : Mr. P. S. Bindra, Mr. Shweta
Priyadarshani, Advocates
versus
THE DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE,
TIS HAZARI COURTS,DELHI & ORS. ..... Respondent
Through : Mr. Santosh K. Tripathi, ASG, GNCTD
Mr. Sanjay Dewan, Advocate for R-1.
Mr. Chetan Lokur, Mr. Viraj R. Datar
and Mr. Karan Mehta, Advocates.
$-13
+ W.P.(C) 5394/2011
CIVIL AND SESSION COURTS DRIVER
WELFARE ASSOCIATION (REGD) ..... Petitioner
Through : Mr. P. S. Bindra, Mr. Shweta
Priyadarshani, Advocates
versus
THE DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE,
TIS HAZARI COURTS ..... Respondent
Through : Mr. Santosh K. Tripathi, ASG, GNCTD
Mr. Sanjay Dewan, Advocate for R-1.
Mr. Chetan Lokur, Mr. Viraj R. Datar
and Mr. Karan Mehta, Advocates.
Mr. Ajay Digpaul, Advocate for CGSC
Mr. Kunal Punj, Advocates for UOI.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S.SISTANI
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL
ORDER
% 09.07.2015
All the above matters have been heard together and are being
disposed of by a common order.
Before we refer to some of the material facts of these writ
petitions, we may note that the Division Bench while passing the order
dated 03.04.2014 had observed :
"We reiterate that the only issue which
survives in this writ petition is with regard
to the arrears for the period prior to the
notification with effect from 01.01.1996."
The petitioners are working in the various District Courts as
Process Servers [W. P. (C) 4964/2011], Stenographers [W. P. (C)
5392/2011], Peon/Orderly and Dak Peons as Group-D Employees [W.
P. (C) 5085/2011] and Drivers [W. P. (C) 5394/2011].
Learned Counsel for the petitioners submits that on 17.02.2012,
the Division Bench had passed the following order:
"We may also point out that there are many serious
anomalies which need to be corrected in view of the
decision in Mirza Zahid Beg. An illustration of such an
anomaly is that the Stenographers and the Upper
Division Clerks are getting lower salaries than the Lower
Division Clerks, though both of them are higher to LDCs
and were earlier getting higher pays. There are similar
anomalies in the sense that people doing the same work
are not being paid equally. It is for this reason that there
is urgency in this matter and the directions have been
issued keeping this in mind."
In the backdrop of this order, we are informed that during the
pendency of these Writ Petitions, Respondent No. 2/ High Court of
Delhi has framed Rules known as Delhi District Courts Establishment
(Appointment and Conditions of Service) Rules, 2012. Having regard
to the fact that the Rules have been set in place, learned counsel
appearing for the petitioners in all these matters reiterates the
observations made by the Division Bench on 03.04.2014.
Learned counsel for the parties submit that the only issue which
now requires consideration is the payment of arrears. Learned counsel
for the petitioners on instructions from the petitioners also submits that
in case the arrears are released, they would forego the interest on the
amount. It is further submitted that pay scales of all three categories
of personnel i.e. Stenographers, Process Servers and Drivers, who are
before this Court, are higher or equivalent to the pay scale of Lower
Division Clerks and since the Lower Division Clerks have been
granted benefit since 01.01.1996, the same benefit should be granted
to them.
Learned counsel for Group-D Employees being Peons/Orderlies
and Dak Peons in W. P. (C) 5085/2011 submits that Group-D
employees would also be entitled to the aforesaid benefit since
01.01.1996 on the basis of parity.
Learned counsel appearing for Delhi Government is unable to
show any reason as to why persons who are placed either equivalent to
Lower Division Clerks or higher can be deprived of the benefit since
01.01.1996 when such benefit was granted to Lower Division Clerks.
The Delhi Government is directed to grant the same benefits to
Stenographers in W. P. (C) 5392/2011, Process Servers in W. P. (C)
4964/2011, Drivers in W. P. (C) 5394/2011 and Peons/Orderlies and
Dak Peons in W. P. (C) 5085/2011 as granted to Lower Division
Clerks from 01.01.1996.
Learned counsel for Delhi Government submits that
Government is unable to consider the request of the petitioners as they
have not received any such proposal.
It is directed that Respondent No. 1 will make a proposal to
the Delhi Government within one month and Delhi Government will
consider the same in the light of the judgment passed by this Court,
within three months, as prayed.
In view of the fact that Delhi District Courts Establishment
(Appointment and Conditions of Service) Rules, 2012 have been
framed by the High Court of Delhi, the petitioners and similarly
situate persons shall be entitled to the revised pay scale. Delhi
Government shall pay the salary to the petitioners and similarly situate
persons, from the month of August, 2015 onwards as per revised pay
scale.
Petitions stand disposed of.
G.S.SISTANI, J.
SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL, J.
JULY 09, 2015
gr
