STATE OF HARYANA Vs. HARYANA CIVIL SECRETARIAT PERSONAL STAFF ASSOCIATION
LAWS(SC)-2002-7-15
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA (FROM: PUNJAB & HARYANA)
Decided on July 10,2002

STATE OF HARYANA Appellant
VERSUS
HARYANA CIVIL SECRETARIAT PERSONAL STAFF ASSOCIATION Respondents





Cited Judgements :-

STATE OF RAJASTHAN VS. KAUSHAL SINGH RATHORE [LAWS(RAJ)-2008-3-34] [REFERRED TO]
UNION OF INDIA VS. JAGROOP SINGH [LAWS(TRIP)-2022-11-8] [REFERRED TO]
GAJAJI GOPALJI JADEJA VS. STATE OF GUJARAT [LAWS(GJH)-2005-2-49] [REFERRED TO]
HARISH C BRAHMBHATT VS. OIL AND NATURAL GAS COMMISSION [LAWS(GJH)-2003-12-53] [RELIED UPON]
SH. H. LALTHANZUALA VS. STATE OF MIZORAM [LAWS(GAU)-2016-12-50] [REFERRED TO]
DWIJEN SINHA VS. TRIPURA JUTE MILLS LTD [LAWS(GAU)-2011-3-125] [REFERRED TO]
UOI VS. Registrar Central Administrative Tribunal [LAWS(MAD)-2006-1-35] [REFERRED TO]
SHYAM PRASAD CHAUDHARY VS. STATE OF BIHAR [LAWS(PAT)-2002-11-14] [REFERRED TO]
SAMASTIPUR KSHETRIYA GRAMIN BANK OFFICERS ASSOCIATION VS. SAMASTIPUR KSHETRIYA GRAMIN BANK [LAWS(PAT)-2003-4-17] [REFERRED TO]
VIKAS NIGAM VS. BRIJENDRA KUMAR BHARGAV [LAWS(MPH)-2018-3-88] [REFERRED TO]
V CHANKERAIAH VS. DIRECTOR GENERAL RAILWAY PROTECTION FORCE [LAWS(APH)-2002-7-133] [REFERRED TO]
PANKAJ GROVER VS. UNION OF INDIA THROUGH SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS AND THE DIRECTOR GENERAL, SHASHTRA SEEMA BAL [LAWS(CA)-2014-5-33] [REFERRED TO]
RANVEER SINGH MAHLE VS. STATE OF U P [LAWS(ALL)-2006-5-199] [REFERRED TO]
DELHI JAL BOARD VS. ITS WORKMEN [LAWS(DLH)-2017-11-8] [REFERRED TO]
NTPC SUPERVISORS WELFARE ASSOCIATION VS. NTPC LTD [LAWS(DLH)-2011-9-41] [REFERRED TO]
GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI VS. ITS WORKMEN [LAWS(DLH)-2007-2-79] [REFERRED TO]
UTTAR PRADESH NURSING ASSISTANTS ASSOCIATION VS. DIRECTOR GENERAL MEDICAL HEALTH AND FAMILY [LAWS(ALL)-2019-1-243] [REFERRED TO]
VIBHA SYNTHETICS PVT LTD VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [LAWS(BOM)-2005-9-91] [REFERRED TO]
NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF PUBLIC FINANCE AND POLICY VS. NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF PUBLIC FINANCE AND POLICY EMPLOYEES UNION [LAWS(DLH)-2016-1-211] [REFERRED TO]
SURESH CHANDRA SHARMA VS. U P STATE SUGAR CORPORATION AND OTHERS [LAWS(ALL)-2018-8-55] [REFERRED TO]
DIRECTOR GENERAL ICAR NEW DELHI AND ORS. VS. WORKMEN AND ORS. [LAWS(DLH)-2012-8-546] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF U P VS. RAMESH PRATAP SINGH [LAWS(ALL)-2003-2-2] [REFERRED TO]
S.K. RATTAN VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(DLH)-2009-5-315] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH VS. AMAR CHAND THAKUR [LAWS(HPH)-2016-11-39] [REFERRED TO]
SHILLONG BENCH RUPENDER SINGH VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(GAU)-2012-8-117] [REFERRED TO]
SHYAM KISHORE VS. STATE OF JHARKHAND [LAWS(JHAR)-2013-5-31] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF WEST BENGAL VS. SUBHAS KUMAR CHATTERJEE [LAWS(SC)-2010-8-97] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF RAJASTHAN VS. RAJASTHAN VIDHI SEVA SANGH [LAWS(RAJ)-2007-5-44] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF GUJARAT VS. STATE BANK OF SAURASHTRA [LAWS(GJH)-2003-7-7] [REFERRED TO]
HARCHARAN SINGH AND OTHERS VS. STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS [LAWS(P&H)-2011-4-426] [REFERRED]
STATE OF U.P. VS. SANJAY KUMAR SAXENA [LAWS(ALL)-2019-7-169] [REFERRED TO]
RAMESH CHANDRA VS. STATE OF U P [LAWS(ALL)-2020-2-547] [REFERRED TO]
WEST BENGAL MINIMUM WAGES INSPECTORS ASSOSIATION VS. STATE OF WEST BENGAL [LAWS(CAL)-2005-1-42] [REFERRED TO]
M. GANESHAN VS. THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, ANIIDCO LTD. AND ORS. [LAWS(CAL)-2015-9-48] [REFERRED TO]
NAT INST.OF PUBLIC FIN AND POLICY VS. PRESIDING OFFICER [LAWS(DLH)-2012-7-656] [REFERRED TO]
NAT INST.OF PUBLIC FIN AND POLICY VS. PRESIDING OFFICER [LAWS(DLH)-2012-7-656] [REFERRED TO]
B.P. SINGH VS. MCD [LAWS(DLH)-2017-9-40] [REFERRED TO]
HASMUKHBHAI JIVABHAI PATEL VS. STATE OF GUJARAT [LAWS(GJH)-2017-4-57] [REFERRED TO]
HARJEET SINGH VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(CA)-2014-11-9] [REFERRED TO]
R AUGUSTINE XAVIER AROCKIASAMY VS. GOVERNMENT OF TAMIL NADU [LAWS(MAD)-2010-1-169] [REFERRED TO]
KISHAN PILLEY VS. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH [LAWS(MPH)-2017-4-52] [REFERRED TO]
MADHYA PRADESH RAJYA BEEJ EVAM FARM VIKAS NIGAM & ANOTHER VS. BRIJENDRA KUMAR BHARGAV & OTHERS [LAWS(MPH)-2018-3-314] [REFERRED TO]
UNION OF INDIA VS. S D BANDHOPADHYAY [LAWS(SC)-2006-10-13] [REFERRED TO]
NISHANT CHAWLA VS. TELECOM DISPUTES SETTLEMENT [LAWS(DLH)-2022-7-199] [REFERRED TO]
MAHMOOD HASAN VS. SOUTH EASTERN COALFIELDS LTD [LAWS(MPH)-2010-4-54] [REFERRED TO]
KRISHAN CHAND VS. STATE OF HARYANA [LAWS(P&H)-2013-7-146] [REFERRED TO]
DISTRICT LEVEL RECRUITMENT COMMITTEE VS. VASANTH SHANKAR RAO [LAWS(KAR)-2009-11-40] [REFERRED TO]
UKAWALA MUKESHKUMAR HIRABHAI VS. STATE OF GUJARAT [LAWS(GJH)-2003-11-4] [REFERRED TO]
SWADESH SINGH THAKUR VS. H.P. UNIVERSITY [LAWS(HPH)-2015-1-44] [REFERRED TO]
MOHD RAMJAN & ANOTHER VS. STATE OF U P & OTHERS [LAWS(ALL)-2018-12-99] [REFERRED TO]
GITA RANI RASTOGI AND OTHERS VS. AUTHORIZED CONTROLLER MEERUT COLLEGE AND OTHERS [LAWS(ALL)-2019-9-13] [REFERRED TO]
HARISH CHANDRA SHUKLA VS. STATE OF U.P. [LAWS(ALL)-2020-1-344] [REFERRED TO]
MT VARGHESE VS. UNION OF INDIA & ORS. [LAWS(DLH)-2013-2-422] [REFERRED TO]
GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AGRICULTURE and CO OPERATION DEPARTMENT HYDERABAD VS. ANDHRA PRADESH STATE CO OPERATIVE SOCIETIES SECREATARIES and EMPLOYEES UNION [LAWS(APH)-2004-1-73] [REFERRED TO]
CHIEF SECURITY COMMISSIONER RAILWAY PROTECTION FORCESOUTH CENTRAL RAILWAY VS. SOUTH CENTRAL RAILWAY PROTECTION FORCE ASSOCIATION [LAWS(APH)-2008-10-47] [REFERRED TO]
GAUHATI MEDICAL COLLEGE TEACHERS ASSOCIATION VS. STATE OF ASSAM [LAWS(GAU)-2008-6-46] [REFERRED TO]
RAJASTHAN SURVEY AND SETTLEMENT EMPLOYEES ASSOCIATION VS. STATE [LAWS(RAJ)-2006-1-120] [REFERRED TO]
RAJINDER PAL GAUTAM VS. STATE OF PUNJAB [LAWS(P&H)-2008-5-233] [REFERRED]
UNION OF INDIA VS. MAHAJABEEN AKHTAR [LAWS(SC)-2007-11-6] [REFERRED TO]
SECRETARY DEPARTMENT PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT VS. AWADH MUNI PRASAD [LAWS(PAT)-2002-1-30] [REFERRED TO]
PURSHOTTAM N THAKKER VS. STATE OF GUJARAT [LAWS(GJH)-2003-12-6] [REFERRED TO]
P A CHUDASAMA VS. SECRETARY [LAWS(GJH)-2003-10-35] [REFERRED TO]
JHARKHAND RETIRED UNIVERSITY TEACHERS ASSOCIATION REPRESENTED VS. STATE OF JHARKHAND [LAWS(JHAR)-2021-3-132] [REFERRED TO]
J K VADALIA & 7 VS. STATE OF GUJARAT [LAWS(GJH)-2012-6-186] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF U P VS. RAM SAGAR S/O BABU RAM [LAWS(ALL)-2019-9-293] [REFERRED TO]
ASISH TARU GHOSH VS. STATE OF WEST BENGAL [LAWS(CAL)-2005-3-85] [REFERRED TO]
NAT INST OF PUBLIC FIN & POLICY & ANR VS. PRESIDING OFFICER & ORS [LAWS(DLH)-2012-8-562] [REFERRED]
NAT INST OF PUBLIC FIN & POLICY & ANR VS. PRESIDING OFFICER & ORS [LAWS(DLH)-2012-8-562] [REFERRED]
ASSOCIATION OF CHEMISTS MAHARASHTRA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD VS. MAHARASHTRA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD [LAWS(BOM)-2007-8-162] [REFERRED TO]
CENTRAL GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES CONSUMER COOPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(DLH)-2010-7-31] [REFERRED TO]
UNION OF INDIA VS. P O CENTRAL GOVT LABOUR COURT [LAWS(DLH)-2007-12-25] [REFERRED TO]
M C SHARMA VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(DLH)-2008-7-108] [REFERRED TO]
RAJEEV KUMAR JAISAWAL VS. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH [LAWS(CHH)-2012-1-87] [REFERRED TO]
GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI AND OTHERS VS. KAMAL KANT SHARMA AND OTHERS [LAWS(DLH)-2017-3-354] [REFERRED TO]
SANJAY GULERIA VS. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH [LAWS(HPH)-2022-5-60] [REFERRED TO]
EMPLOYEES STATE INSURANCE CORPORATION VS. ALL INDIA EMPLOYEES STATE INSURANCE CORPORATION EMPLOYEES FEDERATION [LAWS(DLH)-2010-8-120] [REFERRED TO]
Union of India VS. Abbas Ali Khan [LAWS(DLH)-2006-1-19] [REFERRED TO]
AJIT THAPHIYAL VS. ALL INDIA INSTITUTE OF MEDICAL SCIENCES (AIIMS) [LAWS(CA)-2012-2-24] [REFERRED TO]
BANK OF BARODA VS. BOB EMPLOYEES UNION THROUGH ITS SECRETARY [LAWS(DLH)-2014-3-120] [REFERRED TO]
D Issac Jepakumar VS. Government of Tamil Nadu [LAWS(MAD)-2003-9-99] [REFERRED TO]
UPENDRA KUMAR VERMA VS. THE STATE OF BIHAR AND ORS. [LAWS(PAT)-2015-9-141] [REFERRED TO]
HOME GUARD SAINIK EVAM PARIVAR KALYAN SANGH VS. STATE OF M P [LAWS(MPH)-2011-12-40] [REFERRED TO]
PUNJAB STATE CO-OPERATIVE MILK PRODUCERS FEDERATION LIMITED VS. BALBIR KUMAR WALIA [LAWS(SC)-2021-7-5] [REFERRED TO]
RAJ SUBORDINATE SERVICE ASSOCIATION ECONOMICS AND STATISTICS DEPARTMENT VS. STATE OF RAJASTHAN [LAWS(RAJ)-2006-7-94] [REFERRED TO]
K T VEERAPPA VS. STATE OF KARNATAKA [LAWS(SC)-2006-4-34] [REFERRED TO]
GUJARAT RAJYA PACHHAT VARQA CHHATRALAYA KARMACHARI VS. STATE OF GUJARAT [LAWS(GJH)-2022-7-48] [REFERRED TO]
JUNAID AMIN WANI AND OTHERS VS. STATE OF J&K AND OTHERS [LAWS(J&K)-2018-7-75] [REFERRED TO]
DHIRAJBEN JERAMBHAI KAVAIYA VS. STATE OF GUJARAT [LAWS(GJH)-2002-10-10] [REFERRED]
DILIP KUMAR CHOUDHURY VS. STATE OF ASSAM [LAWS(GAU)-2003-3-5] [RELIED ON]
NAHAKPAM TEJENDRA SINGH VS. STATE OF MANIPUR [LAWS(GAU)-2006-6-36] [REFERRED TO]
KISHAN CHAND SHARMA VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(DLH)-2008-7-385] [REFERRED]
K APPA RAO VS. MANAGING DIRECTOR, ANIIDCO LTD AND ANOTHER [LAWS(CAL)-2015-9-169] [REFERRED]
STATE OF U.P. VS. RAM NARAYAN SRIVSTVA [LAWS(ALL)-2017-10-67] [REFERRED TO]
ANIL KUMAR VS. INDIAN AIRLINES CHAIRMAN [LAWS(ALL)-2014-8-445] [REFERRED TO]
LALIT KUMAR SHAKYA VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(ALL)-2014-4-302] [REFERRED TO]
MAHARASHTRAAGRO INDUSTRIES DEVLOPMENT CORPORATION LTD VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [LAWS(BOM)-2005-10-3] [REFERRED TO]
SURESH KATOCH VS. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH [LAWS(HPH)-2021-6-51] [REFERRED TO]
HAM RAJ GARG AND OTHERS VS. PUNJAB STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD [LAWS(P&H)-2010-8-573] [REFERRED]
SEHDEV PASWAN AND OTHERS VS. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS [LAWS(P&H)-2011-2-505] [REFERRED TO]
POONAM KHANNA VS. CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL ETC [LAWS(P&H)-2009-4-410] [REFERRED]
UNION OF INDIA VS. M.V. MOHANAN NAIR [LAWS(SC)-2020-3-43] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF WEST BENGAL VS. WEST BENGL MINIMUM WAGES INSPECTORS ASSOCIATION [LAWS(SC)-2010-3-68] [REFERRED TO]
AHEIBAM ROMEL SINGH VS. THE STATE OF MANIPUR AND ORS. [LAWS(MANIP)-2021-1-2] [REFERRED TO]
UNION OF INDIA VS. S.K. DASH OFFICE SURVEYOR BHUBANESHWAR [LAWS(MAD)-2014-3-66] [REFERRED TO]
MANIDHISH BHATTACHARJEE VS. NORTH EASTERN HILL UNIVERSITY [LAWS(MEGH)-2013-7-1] [REFERRED TO 11.]
N JAGANNATHAN MEDICAL OFFICER TIRUPATTUR CO OP SUGAR MILLS LTD VS. STATE OF TAMIL NADU [LAWS(MAD)-2010-4-467] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS VS. SHIL KUMAR MARIYA AND OTHERS [LAWS(P&H)-2011-2-520] [REFERRED]
PRAFULLA SHIL VS. STATE OF TRIPURA [LAWS(TRIP)-2020-5-6] [REFERRED TO]
VIBHA SYNTHETICS PVT LTD VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [LAWS(BOM)-2005-10-9] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF WEST BENGAL VS. SOHIDULLAH [LAWS(CAL)-2007-11-9] [REFERRED TO]
M C D VS. ITS WORKMEN [LAWS(DLH)-2007-10-225] [REFERRED TO]
METONGMERENAO VS. STATE OF NAGALAND AND ANR [LAWS(GAU)-2010-11-79] [REFERRED]
MUMBAI GRAHAK PANCHAYAT AND ANOTHER. VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS. [LAWS(BOM)-2017-5-2] [REFERRED TO]
LATHI NAGARPALIKA KARMACHARI MANDAL VS. LATHI NAGAR PALIKA [LAWS(GJH)-2002-10-78] [REFERRED]
M.B. PATEL VS. STATE OF GUJARAT [LAWS(GJH)-2003-12-72] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF GUJARAT VS. SAURASHTRA MAZDOOR SANGH [LAWS(GJH)-2003-7-65] [REFERRED]
STATE OF GUJARAT VS. SAURASHTRA MAZDOOR SANGH [LAWS(GJH)-2003-7-65] [REFERRED]
D.G.O.F. EMPLOYEES ASSOCIATION & ANOTHER VS. UNION OF INDIA & OTHERS [LAWS(DLH)-2014-10-20] [REFERRED TO]
ADMINISTRATOR OF U T OF DADRA AND NAGAR HAVELI VS. R S SUTHAR [LAWS(BOM)-2006-10-118] [REFERRED TO]
UNION OF INDIA VS. G K K PILLAI [LAWS(DLH)-2005-12-4] [REFERRED TO]
NIKUNJ I DESAI VS. SURAT MUNICIPAL CORPORATION THRO MUNICIPAL COMMISSIONER [LAWS(GJH)-2016-2-112] [REFERRED TO]
D J PRASAD VS. REGISTRAR SN KRISHNADEVARAYA UNIVERSITY ANANTAPUR [LAWS(APH)-2002-9-34] [REFERRED TO]
HIRA NAND VS. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS [LAWS(DLH)-2017-9-229] [REFERRED TO]
SHRI. MAHENDRA F. RUPWATE VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [LAWS(BOM)-2016-8-44] [REFERRED TO]
RAM KRISHNA MISHRA VS. STATE OF U P [LAWS(ALL)-2006-1-216] [REFERRED TO]
NIRMALENDU MUKHERJEE VS. STATE OF TRIPURA [LAWS(GAU)-2009-4-13] [REFERRED TO]
RANAGHAT OBR BRIHATTARA GRADUAT TEACHERS ASSOCIATION VS. STATE OF WEST BENGAL [LAWS(CAL)-2019-7-243] [REFERRED TO]
SUSHIL KUMAR GAUTAM VS. STATE OF U.P [LAWS(ALL)-2021-8-183] [REFERRED TO]
VIJAY BAHADUR VS. STATE OF U P [LAWS(ALL)-2015-5-431] [REFERRED TO]
BIMAL TIWARI VS. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH [LAWS(ALL)-2022-4-107] [REFERRED TO]
SANDHYA SINHA VS. STATE OF BIHAR [LAWS(JHAR)-2013-4-27] [REFERRED TO]
SUMITHRA P VS. STATE OF KARNATAKA [LAWS(KAR)-2009-6-30] [REFERRED TO]
KIRAN KUMAR VS. PUNJAB STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD [LAWS(P&H)-2014-5-801] [REFERRED TO]
UNION OF INDIA VS. ALL INDIA NAVAL CLERKS ASSOCIATION [LAWS(KER)-2019-8-22] [REFERRED TO]
HARYANA STATE MINOR IRRIGATION TUBEWELLS CORPORATION VS. G S UPPAL [LAWS(SC)-2008-4-1] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF PUNJAB & ORS. VS. JAGJIT SINGH & ORS. [LAWS(SC)-2016-10-49] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH VS. R.D. SHARMA [LAWS(SC)-2022-1-89] [REFERRED TO]


JUDGEMENT

D. P. Mohapatra, J. - (1.)This appeal filed by the State of Haryana, represented by the Chief Secretary and the Secretary to Government of Haryana, Department of Finance, is directed against the judgment of the Punjab and Haryana High Court dated 13-8-1996 in CWP No. 4206/95 filed by the Haryana Civil Secretariat Personal Staff Association through its General Secretary Shri Ram Mehar Sharma. In the writ petition the petitioner prayed for a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to grant the Personal Assistants (for short 'P.As.') the pay scale of Rs. 2,000-3500 plus Rs. 150/- as special pay which have been given to the P.A.s working in the Central Secretariat for the reason that the State of Haryana had accepted the recommendations made by the Fourth Central Pay Commission with regard to revision of pay scales with effect from 1-1-1986 with all consequential benefits like fixation of pay, arrears and other benefits.
(2.)The case of the writ petitioner sans unnecessary details was that prior to 1986 the P.A.s in the Civil Secretariat, Haryana were enjoying higher scale of pay than the P.A.s of the Central Secretariat. On receipt of the Fourth Central Pay Commisson Report the Central Government revised the pay scale of P.A.s to Rs. 2000-3500 with effect from 1-1-1986. Though the Government of Haryana accepted the recommendations of the Fourth Central Pay Commission and implemented the same in respect of certain categories of employees but in respect of P.A.s in the Civil Secretariat the revised scale of pay was fixed at Rs. 1640-2900 + Rs. 150/- as special pay, instead of Rs. 2000-3500. The further case of the petitioner was that in respect of certain categories of employees of different departments of State of Haryana like Education, Police, Transport, Health and Engineering and Technical staff, the State Government revised the scale of pay exactly according to the recommendation of the Fourth Central Pay Commission and granted them the scale of Rs. 2000-3500 but in case of the P.A.s the State Government fixed the lower revised scale of pay denying them parity of pay scale with their counterparts in the Central Government. The petitioner alleged that the post of P.A. in Civil Sevetariat of the State of Haryana is comparable with the post of P.A. in Central Secretariat; they discharge similar duties and responsibilities as those of their counterparts in the Central Secretariat. The petitioner contended that employees like Police Inspectors and some others who were borne on the same scale of pay as P.A.s prior to implementation of the Fourth Central Pay Commission Report i.e. Rs. 700-1250, were granted the pay scale of Rs. 2000-3200 whereas the P.A.s were placed in the scale of Rs. 1640-2900 only. Such action on the part of the State Government, the petitioner contended, was arbitrary, discriminatory and irrational. The further case of the petitioner was that on receipt of several representations from the petitioner-association and its members, the State Government referred the matter to the Pay Anomalies Commission headed by the Chief Secretary, which did not accept the claim of the petitioner but only recommended the Selection Grade of Rs. 2000-3200 to the 20% of the posts of P.A.s with the condition of 12 years of service. It was asserted by the petitioner that the P.A.s working in the Civil Secretariat were entitled to get the pay scale of Rs. 2000-3500 with effect from 1-1-1986 and the decision taken by the State Government granting the Selection Grade of Rs. 2000-3200 and that too only to those P.A.s who have completed 12 years of services and maximum up to 20% of the posts in cadre is wholly illegal and unjust.
(3.)Refuting the allegations made in the writ petition the respondents in their counter-affidavit questioned the very basis of the claim laid by the petitioner which was based on the assumption that P.A.s in the State Civil Secretariat were entitled to the same scale of pay granted by the Central Government to P.A.s working in the Central Secretariat. Such comparison for the purpose of claim of parity of pay, the respondents contended, was misconceived and was of no avail to the petitioner in the case. According to the respondents, though the State Government on principle accepted the report of the Fourth Central Pay Commission it did not entitle the members of the petitioner to claim post to post and scale to scale parity of pay. The respondents asserted that considering various relevant aspects which were required to be taken into account for fixation of pay scale the State Government decided to fix the revised scale of Rs. 1640-2900 for P.A.s working in the Civil Secretariat and subsequently on recommendation of Pay Anomalies Commission the State Government decided to grant the Selection Grade pay of Rs. 2000-3200 plus Rs. 150/- special pay to P.A.s with 12 years of service and up to 20% of the posts in the cadre. Such administrative decision, the respondents contended, was within the power of the State Government; therefore the decision cannot be said to be arbitrary or irrational.


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.