AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Kurian Joseph, C.J.—The present petition has been filed with the following prayers:
a). The order, contained in Annexure-P-5 may kindly be struck down/ quashed being wholly wrong, illegal, arbitrary, laconic, unreasoned and violative of Article 16 of the Constitution of India.;
b.) The respondents No. 1 and 2 be directed to affirm the placement of the petitioner in the revised pay scale of Rs. 4020-6200 already fixed w.e.f. 1.6.1996 and to protect his pay like other employees.
In the reply at para-6(d), it is stated as follows:
In reply to this sub para of the OA it is submitted that Sh. Roop Lal respondent No. 3 was promoted as Assistant Manager (Tpt) on 1.6.96 under the quota reserved for schedule tribe category to which he belongs. The applicant is not entitled to claim his promotion from the date Sh. Roop Lal was promoted as such. The applicant has intermingled the two different issues of promotion of Respondent No. 3 and recovery of excess amount due to correction of revised pay scales allowed from 1.1.96. It may be clarified here that the revised pay scales were adopted from 1.1.96. The respondent Corporation has adopted the Himachal Pradesh Civil Service (Revised Pay) Rules, 1996 notified on 20.1.98. The said rules contains a Schedule in which general conversion of pre revised pay scales to revised scales applicable from 1.1.96 has been given, a copy of which is enclosed as Annexure R-1. The Revised Pay Rules were amended vide notification dated 1.9.98, a copy of which is enclosed as Annexure R-II. Under the amendment, specified revised pay scales to the category of clerks to which the applicant belongs were notified. After revision of pay scales from 1.1.96 the entire matter had to be reviewed from 1.1.96. The applicant who had been placed in the Sr. Scale of Rs. 1200-2130 (pre revised) from 1.6.96 was given the revised pay scale of Rs. 4020-6200 from 1.6.96 on the basis of Annexure RI-I which had to be corrected to Rs. 3120-5160 from 1.1.96 as per Annexure-RI-2.)
However, the fact remains that the petitioner had enjoyed the pay scale while working in the post, therefore, it is just and proper that the respondents are restrained from recovering the salary already paid to the petitioner in that post. Ordered accordingly. It is made clear that there shall be no recovery on account of re-fixation.
This writ petition stands disposed of, so also the pending application(s), if any.