Punjab-Haryana High Court
Mahipal Singh vs Union Of India & Ors on 5 September, 2024
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:116522
CWP-1584--2014
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
(212)
CWP-1584-20142014
Date of Decision:- 05.09.2024
2024
Mahipal Singh
......Petitioner
Versus
Union of India and others
......Respondentss
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK JAIN
****
Present: Mr.
r. Aryan Singh, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. Sourabh Goel, Advocate for the respondents.
****
ALOK JAIN,
JAIN J. (Oral)
The present petition has been file
filed for issuance of a writ in the
nature of certiorari seeking quashing of the impugned order dated
15.10.2013 (Annexure P-13)
P 13) and the impugned order dated 15.01.2014
(Annexure P-15).
P
2. Vide order dated 05.12.2023, the petitioner had relied upon the
judgment
nt passed by this Court in CWP No. 7466 of 2013 title
titled as Rattan
Chand Vs. Union of India
I and others and the time ha
has been sought by the
counsel for the respondents to address arguments.
3. Learned counsel for the respondents has vehemently argued
that the casee of the petitioner is not covered by the said judgment
judgment, on the
1 of 3
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:116522
CWP-1584--2014
factual matrix as in the said case of Rattan Chand, the petitioner was not
allowed to exercise the option, whereas in the present case, the petitioner
was given several opportunities to exercise the option for which he relies
upon the Additional affidavit filed by the DIG (Adm.) Headquarter on
01.09.2022
.2022 in which para 7 reads as under:
"7. That in this regard it is pertinent to mention here
that after passing of order dated 20.11.2019 vide Signal
No. J.II.820/2014-Legal
Legal dated 10.02.2020 information
was sought regarding the publicity given for giving
option for the pay fixation in revised pay scale. Copy of
Signal is Annexure A-1.
1. In reply to the above Signal,
P.I.1/2020-2 Sig. SRC-II dated
12.02.2020; it was informed that files pertaining to the
year 2009 (Sr. No. 68 REG.CORSP. of pay fixation
containing 1 to 185 pages) has bee
been
n destroyed by
burning after approval of the competent authority. Copy
of the Signal dated 12.02.2020 is Annexure A/2/."
4. However, perusal of the said affidavit demonstrates that in
para 8, it has been admitted by the respondents that the record pertaining
ining to
the pay fixation in the year 2009 was destroyed after following due
procedure and along with the record the information regarding option, if
any, given by other personnel at the relevant time was also destroyed and
therefore, such information is also not available.
5. I have gone through the merits of the case and there is no
denial of the principle of law as held in the judgment passed by this Court
in the case of Rattan Chand Vs. Union of India and others
others.
6. In light of the above, the present petition deserves to be
2 of 3
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:116522
CWP-1584--2014
allowed, as the basic intent that Rule 23 is for removal of anomaly by
stepping up of the pay of Senior on promotion who are drawing less pay
than his junior,
junior that
hat being the basic principle
principle. This minor
inor anomaly that the
option was exercised or not,
not cannot be a ground to deny the benefits to the
petitioner.
7. As per the above, since the delay occurred on account of the
record being destroyed, coupled with the fact that the petitioner has retired
from
rom the service in the year 2013 and this petition is also pending for the
last 10 years,
years, the ends of justice would be met if the present petition is
allowed and the petitioner is granted the concession of correct fixation of
his pay after giving the benefit
benefit of stepping up of pay scale in accordance
with law. however, in case, the necessary exercise will not be done within
three months from today, the respondents shall be liable to pay interest @
6 % per annum and the pay of the concerned official shall re
remained
mained stayed
for the time till the payment is not made to the petitioner.
8. Needless to say that since the petitioner hhad already retired,,
therefore, his pension shall also be re-fixed.
re
9. With the above,, the present petition stands allowed.
(ALOK JAIN)
JUDGE
05.09.2024
Parul
Whether speaking/reasoned:
speaking/reasoned:- Yes/No
Whether Reportable:- Yes/No
3 of 3
