NARENDER KUMAR Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This order shall dispose of a bunch of 9 petitions as common question of law and facts are involved. The short issue involved in these petitions is whether a promotee employee would be covered by the Assured Career Progression Scheme (ACP Scheme), which has been framed by the respondent State of Haryana, and would be entitled to get 1st and 2nd ACP Scale on completion of 10 and 20 years of regular service. The petitioner(s) have challenged various orders passed by the respondents with the grievance that their pay has been wrongly fixed because the benefit of grant of ACP Scales on completion of 10 and 20 years of regular service has not been granted to them.

(2.) The factual position of these petitions needs not to be highlighted because the learned counsel for the parties are ad idem that the controversy raised in these petitions is no longer res integra as the same has been put to at rest by the judgment of Honble the Supreme Court rendered in the case of Commissioner Vs. Ram Sarup , 2006 (12) Scale 440. It is pertinent to mention that a series of writ petitions were filed before this Court by various Government employees espousing their grievance that they have been denied the benefit of ACP Scheme. It was pointed out that they joined the service as Group D employees and later promoted to Group C posts. In the year 1991, the State of Haryana framed a scheme to grant additional increments to the Government employees based on their length of service i.e. one additional increment on completion of 10 years service and the next increment for those who completed 20 years service. In the year 1994, another scheme was introduced known as the Higher Standard Scale Scheme for Group C and Group D employees on completion of 10 years or more and 20 years or more regular and satisfactory service. With effect from 1.1.1996, the Central Government introduced a Scheme known as the Assured Career Progression (ACP). The State of Haryana adopted the said Scheme by framing Rules under Art. 309 of the Constitution, namely, the Haryana Civil Services (Assured Career Progression) Rules, 1998 (for brevity, the ACP Rules). Those employees had a total service of 20 years and got two up-gradations. Since they had started their career as Group D employees, they were given the benefit of ACP scales, which were applicable to Group D employees. An audit objection was raised that those employees who were initially recruited in Group D post, would not be granted ACP Scales, applicable to Group C posts even if they are promoted to the cadre of Group C because both the posts constitute a separate class of employees. The Division Bench of this Court allowed the writ petitions holding that the employees were entitled to get the ACP Scales that are applicable to Group C posts. The judgment was rendered in the case of Suraj Bhan and others Vs. State of (CWP No. 45 of 1999, decided on 21.9.2000).

(3.) The matter eventually travelled to Honble the Supreme Court. After observing the factual position and Rule 5 and 9 of the ACP Rules, Honble the Supreme Court vide judgment rendered in the case of Ram Sarup Ganda (supra) Ram Sarup Ganda (supra) partly allowed the appeals by observing as under:-