WPSB/508/2022
2022 Latest Caselaw 2631 UK

                Office Notes,
             reports, orders or
SL.           proceedings or
      Date                                     COURT'S OR JUDGES'S ORDERS
No             directions and
             Registrar's order
              with Signatures

                                  IA/1/2022 (for Stay Application)
                                  WPSB No.508 of 2022
                                  Shri Vipin Sanghi, C.J.
                                  Shri Ramesh Chandra Khulbe, J.

Mr. Vikas Pande, learned Standing Counsel for the State-petitioners. The State has assailed the judgment dated 28.09.2021 rendered by the Uttrakhand Public Services Tribunal at Dehradun in Claim Petition No.29/DB/2020.

A perusal of the impugned judgment, in fact, gives the impression that the Claim Petition has not been accepted by the Tribunal. The only direction issued by the Tribunal is in Para 21, which reads as follows:-

We also observe that, had the above mistake not been committed by the Govt., the pay scales of the accounts staff of the treasuries and the petitioner's department would have continued to remain the same after April, 2001. The Rules of 2019 have placed them under the same Rules with equal pay scales. Therefore, it is necessary that now the parity in the pay scales of the accounts staff of the petitioner's department and the treasuries is brought about from 12.06.2019 onwards, when the Rules of 2019 have been notified. This can be done either by suitably enhancing pay scales mentioned in these Rules or by subsuming the erstwhile enhanced pay scales of the treasury employees in their Assured Career Progression/Modified Assured Career Progression or in any other manner, which the Government may deem fit after hearing the affected parties. The respondents are directed to ensure the same within a period of six months from the date of presentation of certified copy of this order."

The submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that the Tribunal has directed the State to suitably enhance pay-scales mentioned in the Rules of 2019 or by subsuming the erstwhile enhanced pay-scales of the treasury employees in their Assured Career Progression/Modified Assured Career Progression or in any other manner, which the Government may deem fit after hearing the affected parties.

He submits that, therefore, the direction issued by the Tribunal to the aforesaid affect is against the interest of the State.

Prima facie, it appears that the Tribunal has only made suggestion and ultimately left it open to the State by observing "or in any other manner, which the Government may deem fit after hearing the affected parties".

Counsel for the petitioner wishes to take instructions whether the petitioner- State wishes to pursue the present petition in the aforesaid light.

List on 02.01.2023.

(R.C. Khulbe, J.) (Vipin Sanghi, C.J.) 24.08.2022 R.Bisht