Ravinder Kumar And Others vs State Of Haryana And Others
2024 Latest Caselaw 16100 P&H

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Ravinder Kumar And Others vs State Of Haryana And Others on 3 September, 2024

Author: Jasgurpreet Singh Puri

Bench: Jasgurpreet Singh Puri

                                      Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:117305

RA-CW-417-2019                           -1

CWP-25198-2017
                          212
            IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
                        AT CHANDIGARH


                                                         RA-CW-417-2019 in
                                                             CWP-25198-2017
                                                    Date of decision: 03.09.2024


Ravinder Kumar and others
                                                                    ...Petitioners

                                   VERSUS

State of Haryana and others

                                                                 ...Respondents

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASGURPREET SINGH PURI

Present:    Mr. Padamkant Dwivedi, Advocate with
            Mr. Naman Jain, Advocate,
            for the applicants/respondents No.3 & 4.

            Mr. Gaurav Jindal, Additional Advocate General, Haryana.

            Mr. Dinesh Arora, Advocate,
            for the non-applicants/petitioners.

                  ****

JASGURPREET SINGH PURI, J. (Oral)

1. The present review application has been filed under Order 47 Rule

1 and 2 read with Section 114 of the Code of Civil Procedure for review of the

judgment dated 22.08.2019.

2. Mr. Padamkant Dwivedi, learned counsel appearing on behalf of

the review applicants submitted that the petitioners/non-applicants were

appointed in the year 2012, 2013 and 2014 respectively and regarding the same

respective dates have been mentioned in para No.3 of the petition on the posts

of Assistant Lecturer-cum-Assistant Instructor and the appointment letters have

been attached as Annexure P-1(colly). He submitted that in the aforesaid

1 of 5

Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:117305

RA-CW-417-2019 -2

CWP-25198-2017 appointment letter, the pay scale of Rs.9300-34800 with Grade Pay of Rs.

3300/- was granted and the appointment letters were issued by the Principal of

the respondent-Institute. He submitted that thereafter the aforesaid Grade pay

of Rs.3300/- was revised to Rs. 3600/- regarding which there is no dispute but

the petitioners/non-applicants had filed the present writ petition seeking grant

of Grade Pay of Rs. 4200/- on the strength of Staff Regulations of the State

Institute of Hotel Management, Tilyar Lake, Rohtak vide Annexure P-5 wherein

the Grade Pay has been provided to be Rs. 4200/- for the pay scale of Rs. 9300-

34800/-,and because of the aforesaid reason, the present writ petition was

allowed. He submitted that in fact the petitioners/non-applicants fell in group

'C' and not in group 'B' and once they fell in group 'C', their Grade Pay could

not have been Rs. 4200/- and their Grade Pay was to be Rs. 3300/- which was

correctly so stated in the appointment letter which was subsequently revised to

Rs. 3600/-. In this regard, he also referred to the fitment table which has been

attached alongwith the present review application as Annexure RA-1 wherein

the pay scale of Assistant Lecturer-cum-Assistant Instructor was Rs. 5000-8000

and thereafter vide Annexure RA-4 the comparative fitment table as so framed

by the Haryana Government in the First Schedule was Rs. 5450-8000 and the

corresponding pay scale was revised to Rs. 9300-34800 with a Grade Pay of

Rs. 3300/- and in this way, the petitioners were only entitled to the Grade Pay

of Rs. 3300/- (subsequently revised as Rs. 3600/-) and, therefore, the

judgment is required to be reviewed in this regard. He also submitted that since

there was an ambiguity in the Regulations (Annexure P-5) pertaining to the

classification/ grouping of Group 'C' and 'D', the same was rectified by way of

an amendment made wherein revised/amended Staff Regulations were framed

in the year 2019 which have been attached alongwith review application at

2 of 5

Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:117305

RA-CW-417-2019 -3

CWP-25198-2017 page No. 48 whereby it has been so provided that the pay band of Assistant

Lecturer-cum-Assistant Instructor shall be Rs. 9300-34800 with a Grade Pay of

Rs.3300/- revised to Rs. 3600/-. He submitted that the petitioners/non-

applicants are being given the Grade Pay of Rs. 3600/- and now after the

aforesaid amendment in the year 2019, it is very clear that the petitioners being

in the cadre of Assistant Lecturer-cum-Assistant Instructor are entitled for the

aforesaid Grade Pay of Rs. 3600/- and ,therefore, the aforesaid judgment may

kindly be reviewed to the extent that from the date of the coming into force of

the Regulations (Annexure P-5) till the amendment was effected in the year

2019, the petitioners should also be granted the same Grade Pay of Rs. 3300/-

revised to Rs. 3600/- and not Rs. 4200/-.

3. On the other hand, learned counsel for the petitioners/non-

applicants has submitted that there is no ground available with the applicants

for review of the judgment because there is no error apparent on the face of the

record. He submitted that it is not in dispute that the Regulations (Annexure

P-5) which were applicable to the petitioners were in operation and were

applicable to the petitioners and rather the mistake which was committed in

the aforesaid Regulations has now been rectified in the year 2019 wherein the

Grade Pay has been mentioned to be Rs. 3300/- revised to Rs. 3600/- and the

petitioners/non-applicants are not claiming anything post the aforesaid

amendment of 2019 because once an amendment has been effected in the

Regulations, then the petitioners are bound by the same but now the only

dispute remains with regard to the period i.e. from on the date on which the

Regulations (Annexure P-5) came into force till the amendment effected in the

year 2019 and that is the only monetary benefit, the petitioners are entitled as it

3 of 5

Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:117305

RA-CW-417-2019 -4

CWP-25198-2017 was because of their own Regulations (Annexure P-5) which have been so

relied upon and given effect to in the judgment under review and rather once

the respondents themselves have rectified their own mistake, then the

entitlement of the petitioners was in accordance with the Regulations

(Annexure P-5) till the time when the amendment was effected in the year

2019.

4. I have heard the learned counsels for the parties.

5. The writ petition was allowed vide judgment dated 22.08.2019 on

the strength of Annexure P-5. It is a case of the applicants/respondents No.3

and 4 that there was an anomly/mistake in the aforesaid Annexure P-5 wherein

proper distribution of Group 'B' and 'C' was not made. However, the aforesaid

anomaly/mistake was removed in the year 2019 wherein at page No.48 of the

review application the pay band of Assistant Lecturer-cum-Assistant Instructor

was Rs. 9300-34800 with a Grade Pay of Rs.3300/- revised to Rs. 3600/-. The

only dispute as raised by the learned counsel for the applicants was pertaining

to the fixation of the Grade Pay from the coming into force of Annexure P-5

till the year 2019 when it was amended. There is no dispute with regard to the

post amendment of 2019. Therefore, it is very clear that as of now and rather

after the amendment which was effected in the year 2019, there is no anomaly

which is required to be removed. Now the only dispute is with regard to as to

whether the petitioners were entitled for the monetary benefit or not. This

Court is of the considered view that there is no error apparent on the face of it

which is required to be reviewed in view of the aforesaid factual position

particularly that the aforesaid Annexure P-5 has rather been amended by the

respondents themselves in the year 2019 and anomaly has been removed and

4 of 5

Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:117305

RA-CW-417-2019 -5

CWP-25198-2017 the petitioners who were in pay scale of Rs. 9300-34800 were required to be

given the Grade Pay of Rs. 4200/- as per Annexure P-5. The mere fact that at

the time of the appointment of the petitioners were stated to be in the Grade

Pay of Rs.3300/- and the appointment was made prior to the coming into force

of the Regulations (Annexure P-5) would not mean that the petitioners can be

deprived of the enforcement of the aforesaid Staff Regulations wherein against

the pay scale of Rs. 9300-34800 the Grade Pay has been so prescribed to be

Rs. 4200/-. So far as the enforceability and sanctity of the aforesaid

Regulations are concerned, the same now cannot be disputed particularly in

view of the fact that now even the respondents have on their own amended the

aforesaid Staff Regulations and therefore, it cannot be said that the aforesaid

Staff Regulation did not have any force of law.

6. Consequently, finding no merit in the present review application,

the same is hereby dismissed.

                                  (JASGURPREET SINGH PURI)
03.09.2024                              JUDGE
rakesh
             Whether speaking/reasoned     :        Yes/No
             Whether reportable            :        Yes/No




                                         5 of 5