AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Heard Mr. Ganesh Prasad Singh, learned Senior Counsel appearing in support of this review application.
The application is for review of the order, dated 9.2.2000 by which L.P.A. No. 935 of 1999 filed by the applicants against the order of the learned single Judge, rejecting their writ petition was dismissed by a brief though reasoned order.
Mr. Ganesh Pd. Singh pointed out that the order of which review was prayed for stated that the Appellants-applicants were claiming a higher scale of pay. According to Mr. Singh this was an erroneous premise on which the court had proceeded with the case and dismissed the appeal. Mr. Singh stated that the Appellants-applicants were in fact claiming certain perks'' which were not part of salary and in support of the submission invited our attention to certain materials on the record of the writ petition.
On examining the materials pointed out to us and on hearing Mr. Singh we are unable to accept the submission. In the first place in the earlier round of litigation when the matter had come before another division bench, the Petitioners'' writ petition was dismissed by making the following observation:
This application has been filed for quashing the order dated 2nd January, 1991, as contained in Annexure-17, by which 30% increment in the pay scale granted in favour of the Petitioners has been withdrawn.
Secondly, the order to which Mr. Singh made a reference makes it very clear that the revised pay scale granted to the Appellants-applicants was fixed on merging the amount of interim relief and the dearness allowance being paid to the employees of the bank on the unrevised scale of pay. As a consequence of the revision of the pay scale, therefore, a decision was taken not to pay any interim relief any further and to pay dearness allowance @ 15% on the revised scale of pay. In these circumstances, it can hardly be said that the Petitioners claim was for any perks not forming part of the wages.
On hearing Mr. Singh, we are satisfied that no case is made out for review of the order dismissing the applicants'' appeal. This petition for review is accordingly dismissed.