Shri Badri Nath Sharma vs State of Himachal Pradesh

Deepak Gupta, J.—The petitioner, by means of this petition, has prayed that the respondents be directed to grant him arrears of pay as Assistant Project Officer with effect from the date the petitioner was performing the functions of Assistant Project Officer i.e. 26.2.1983 with 12% interest per annum. Earlier the petitioner had filed a writ petition in this Court, bearing CWP No.1088 of 2010, praying that the scale of Rs.7220-11660 payable to the Assistant Project Officers be granted to him from the date he was performing these functions. This petition was disposed of on 31.3.2010 with a direction to the 3rd respondent to take appropriate action in the matter. Thereafter, the Deputy Commissioner-cum-Chairman of District Rural Development Agency, Kangra at Dharamshala granted the scale of Rs.7220-11660 to the petitioner w.e.f. 1.5.2010. The grievance of the petitioner now is that he should have been granted the pay scale from the date he started performing duties as Assistant Project Officer.

There is no manner of doubt that the petitioner is performing the duties of Assistant Project Officer since long. In fact, on 5th June, 1985 the Governing Body of the District Rural Development Agency (DRDA) delegated the powers of recruitment and termination of the staff to the Deputy Commissioner who was the Chairman of the DRDA. On 18.3.1993, the Chairman DRDA posted the petitioner as Assistant Project Officer (Planning) and he continued to discharge such functions. In some other Districts the Assistant Project Officers were given the higher pay scales but somehow that was not given to the petitioner. His case was recommended for grant of higher pay scale by the Chairman of the DRDA on various occasions but to no avail. On 1.12.2008 the Governing body of the DRDA again met and it was agreed and unanimously approved that the petitioner be promoted as Assistant Project Officer in the pay scale of Rs.7220-11660. Despite this resolution, the scale was not granted to the petitioner and finally he had to approach this Court in the year 2010.

The question is whether the petitioner is entitled to the same from an earlier date and if so, from which date. Various authorities have been cited before us by Sh. Davinder Sharma, Advocate, learned counsel for the petitioner, but it is not necessary to deal with each and every authority as most of them do not directly deal with the issue in hand. Since the petitioner has been working as Assistant Project Officer with the approval of the Governing Body since 18th March, 1993, while fixing his salary he shall be deemed to be in the scale of Assistant Project Officer w.e.f. 18.3.1993 and will be granted notional increments accordingly. However, the petitioner cannot get arrears for this entire period.

The petitioner approached the Court only in the year 2010 and kept silent for 17 years. Making repeated representations to the employer will not extend the period of limitation. If the petitioner was to file a suit for arrears of salary, the limitation would be three years and in a case against the State, two months time can be added for giving notice u/s 80 CPC. The petitioner approached this Court sometime in the end of February or beginning of March, 2010 and we feel that he should be entitled to the arrear of 38 months i.e. w.e.f. 1st January, 2007. Therefore, we allow the writ petition to the extent that the petitioner will be entitled to the scale of Assistant Project Officer w.e.f. 18.3.1993 for fixing of pay but the arrears shall be paid to him only w.e.f. 1st January, 2007 onwards.The writ petition is disposed of in the aforesaid terms. No order as to costs.