Jammu & Kashmir High Court - Srinagar Bench
Ghulam Mohammad Palla & Ors vs Through on 26 August, 2022
1
HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR, AND LADAKH
AT SRINAGAR
SWP No.394/2017
Reserved on: 29.06.2022
Pronounced on: 26.08.2022
Ghulam Mohammad Palla & ors.
... Petitioners
Through:
Mr. Z. A. Shah, Sr. Advocate, with
Mr. A. Hanan, Advocate.
v.
Union of India & ors.
...Respondents
Though:
Mr. T.M. Shamshi, ASGI.
CORAM:
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ali Mohammad Magrey, Judge
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mohd Akram Chowdhary, Judge
Judgment
Per Magrey J:
1. This petition challenges the judgment and order dated 07.06.2016
passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench,
Chandigarh, in the petitioners' OA No.062/00018/2015 titled 'Ghulam
Mohammad Palla & ors v Union of India & ors.', dismissing the same.
2. The petitioners claim to be working as Valvemen in the MES
Department. Their counter parts at Jammu who were then working as semi-
skilled category in the grade of Rs.210-290, relying on the judgment dated
31.07.1991 of the Supreme Court passed in writ petition No.40/1991, had filed
a writ petition, SWP No.1393/1994, seeking up-gradation to the category of
skilled employees with grade of Rs.260-400 with effect from 16.10.1991.
That writ petition was allowed by the High Court of J&K at Jammu vide
judgment and order dated 12.03.1997. The intra Court appeal against the
judgment was dismissed. However, the Supreme Court vide order dated
06.10.2005 passed in Civil Appeal No.5825 of 2000 remitted the matter to the
Division Bench. The Division Bench vide its detailed judgment dated
19.08.2010 held and directed as under:
"43. Since the Government itself has accorded sanction
for implementation of judgments and direct ions of the various
Courts and Tribunals including this Court, as reflected in the
above communications, there shall be no impediment in up-
gradation of the respondents' grade to skilled category in the scale
of Rs.260-400, as prayed for.
44. In consideration of the above and having taken note
of the facts and circumstances of the case in its entirety, we are of
the view that the respondents, who are undisputedly also
performing their duties as are assigned to the skilled workers, are
entitled to skilled grade of Rs.260-400 with effect from October
16, 1981, in the light of the principle of 'equal pay for equal work,
which itself is a concomitant of Article 14 of the Constitution of
India.
45. In view of the above discussion and observations,
these appeals are, accordingly, dismissed."
Complying the aforesaid judgment dated 19.08.2010, the appellants before the
Division Bench vide order dated 05.01.2012 initially sought to grant re-
fixation on notio9nal basis, restricting the actual arrears only to 18 months
from the date of filing of the respective OA. However, on the orders dated
31.03.2015 passed by the Division Bench in Contempt (LPA) No.5/2012, the
concerned authority issued amendment to the earlier order by order dated
13.04.2015, reading that "the pay shall be re-fixed and the arrears shall be paid
w.e.f. 16 Oct 1981, subject to filing of SLP in Hon'ble Supreme Court and
decision thereon".
3. It appears that, meanwhile, another group of employees filed a similar
petition at Srinagar Wing of the High Court, being writ petition SWP
no.1656/2012. That petition was disposed of by order dated 05.11.2012 with
direction to the respondents therein to accord consideration to the petitioners'
claim in accordance with rules. The concerned authority in consideration of
the claim of those petitioners, by order dated 30.11.2012, inter alia, directed
that they should approach the Central Administrative Tribunal (the Tribunal),
Chandigarh for getting an appropriate order from the Tribunal.
4. The petitioners filed contempt petition COA No.34/2013 before the
High Court in which the Court vide order dated 06.02.2013 is stated to have
sought compliance report from the respondents. In consequence thereof, it is
stated that the Engineer-in-Charge issued order dated 26.03.2013, according
approval to the grant of skilled grade to the petitioners with effect from the
date of their initial appointment or date of promotion as Valveman or with
effect from 16.10.1981, whichever would be later with a rider that re-fixation
of pay shall be notional and the actual arrears shall be restricted for 18 months
prior to the date of filing of the case.
5. Feeling aggrieved of the aforesaid order dated 26.03.2013 inasmuch as
they were granted actual arrears only for 18 months, the petitioners herein
approached the Tribunal, Chandigarh, through OA No.062/00018/2015
challenging the aforesaid order dated 26.03.2013, and sought a direction to
the respondents to grant the actual benefit of pay fixation to them in the pay
scale of Rs.260-400 with effect from 16.10.1981. As already said, the Tribunal
dismissed the petitioners' OA. Hence this writ petition.
6. The respondents in their reply have vehemently supported the judgment
of the Tribunal.
7. We heard learned counsel for the parties and considered the matter.
8. The Tribunal has in the impugned judgment and order observed and
held as under:
"4. At the very outset, both the litigating parties were in
agreement that the benefit of revised pay fixation to the Valveman
has emerged out of High Court of Jammu and Kashmir order dated
18.10.2012 wherein it has been held that the applicants would be
entitled to benefit of pay scale of skilled Caneman notionally, but
the arrears would be confined to the period of 18 months
preceding the date of filing of the OA. This order has attained
finality as the SLP filed by the respondents against this order was
dismissed by the Hon'ble Apex Court. It is an admitted fact that
the issue of benefit of revised pay fixation has been settled through
several orders of the Tribunal and the judgments of the High
Courts. The issue of arrears to be granted from the date of initial
appointment was also adjudicated by the Tribunal and
consequential benefits were ordered to be given from the date of
initial appointment in some cases. However, in an order dated
18.10.2012, the High Court of Jammu and Kashmir has held that
the similarly placed applicants-respondents before the High Court
would be entitled to the benefit of pay-scale notionally, but the
arrears will be confined to eighteen months preceding the date of
filing of the OA. This basic principle has neither been set aside or
altered in any subsequent judgment. In the light of this fact, it will
only be just and proper that we get guided by the ratio laid down
in the judgment of High Court of J&K dated 18.10.2012."
9. Perusal of the above passage of judgment clearly establishes that the
petitioners were held entitled to the benefit as emerged out of the order passed
by this Court on 18.10.2012 in SWP No.1698/2012. The findings recorded
and observations made are based on the discussion related to the judgment
made by the Tribunal in similarly situated cases.
10. We are in agreement with the conclusion drawn by the Tribunal in
terms of order dated 07.06.2016 passed in OA No. 062/00018/2015 titled
'Ghulam Mohammad Pala & ors v Union of India & ors'.
11. In the above background, this Writ Petition is found to be without any
merit, as a sequel thereto, the same shall stand dismissed. Consequently, the
judgment and order of the learned Tribunal dated 07.06.2016 passed in the
petitioners' OA No.062/00018/2015 titled 'Ghulam Mohammad Palla & ors
v Union of India & ors.' is maintained.
12. No order as to costs.
(Mohd Akram Chowdhary) (Ali Mohammad Magrey)
Judge Judge
Srinagar
26.08.2022
SAH, Secy.
Whether approved for reporting: Yes
ABDUL HAMID BHAT
2022.08.26 11:27
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
