- (1.) After the matter was heard at some length, this Court passed an order dated 28.4.2011 summarising the controversy in hand and asked for certain clarifications from the Chief Secretary of the State. The order is quoted below: Personal Assistants Brotherhood, Office of the U.P. State Law Officer, Allahabad/Lucknow, High Court, Allahabad has filed this writ petition on 19th December, 1996 for a mandamus directing the Respondents to fix the salary of its members/personal assistants working in the office of U.P. State Law Officers, High Court of Allahabad both at Allahabad as well as at Lucknow at par with the personal assistants working in the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad w.e.f. 1st January, 1986 i.e. in the pay-scale of Rs. 2000-3500. On behalf of the Petitioner, reliance has been placed upon the Division Bench judgment of this Court dated 29th July, 1998 passed in Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 17885 of 1996 (Private Secretaries Brotherhood and Ors. v. The State of U.P. & The Advocate General, U.P.), wherein the Division Bench, after considering the Government Orders issued from time to time, as well as the Judgments of this Court passed in earlier writ petitions, recorded a categorical finding that the employees working in the office of U.P. State Law Officers both at Allahabad as well as at Lucknow, are entitled to be treated similarly with the employees working in the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad on the corresponding post. This judgment of the Division Bench was subjected to challenge before the Supreme Court by way of Civil Appeal No. 2732 of 1999, which was dismissed vide judgment dated 28th November, 2007. The review application filed before the Hon'ble Supreme Court being Review Petition (C) No. 877 of 2008 was also dismissed vide order dated 23rd July, 2008. It has been pointed out to the Court that earlier the State had taken a decision to provide two different pay-scales to the personal assistants working in the High Court, namely, (a) Rs. 2000-3200/- and (b) Rs. 2000-3500/-. However, the controversy in that regard may not detain the Court for long, inasmuch as by means of the Government Order dated 23rd December, 1997, the two scales have been merged and revised pay-scales w.e.f. 1st January, 1996, has been provided at Rs. 6500-10,500/-. The aforesaid merger of two pay-scales w.e.f. 1st January, 1996 into pay-scale of Rs. 6500-10,500/- is relevant for our purposes, inasmuch as in the judgment of the Division Bench relied upon by the Petitioners themselves in the case of Private Secretaries Brotherhood , relief of parity has been granted only from the date of institution of the said writ petition, which direction could necessarily be applied in the facts of the present case for the same reasons. Therefore, the relief as prayed for in the present writ petition is also to be provided only from the date of institution of the present writ petition i.e. 16th December, 1996, when the two scales of personal assistants admittedly stand merged into one i.e. Rs. 6500-10,500/-w.e.f. 1st January, 1996. This Court finds from the Government Order dated 22nd October, 2008 enclosed as Annexure-R.A.8 to the rejoinder-affidavit that the State Government had constituted a Committee headed by Chief Secretary of the State for examining the issue of parity of pay-scales. The Committee known as "Vetan Samiti-1997-98, under the Chairmanship of Chief Secretary, has recommended grant of parity to the personal assistants working in the office of the U.P. State Law Officers both at Allahabad as well as at Lucknow with the personal assistants working in the establishment of the High Court. On that basis salary of the personal assistants working in the office of the State Law Officers both at Allahabad as well as at Lucknow, have been granted pay-scale of Rs. 6500-10,500/-w.e.f. 21st June, 2007. It is, therefore, clear that the controversy, so far as the claim of parity with the employees working on corresponding posts in the High Court is concerned, stand answered in favour of the Petitioners under the recommendation of the Samta Samiti, as have been accepted by the State Government, as per its Government Order dated 22nd October, 2008. However, for the reasons not disclosed, such grant of salary on the ground of parity in the pay-scale of Rs. 6500-10,500/-has been provided only w.e.f. 21st June, 2007. Issue does arise that if the personal assistants working in the office of the U.P. State Law Officers have been found to be entitled to the pay-scale of Rs. 6500-10,500/- w.e.f. 21st June, 2007 on the principle of parity with the employees working on the corresponding posts in the establishment of High Court, on what basis, the State Government has chosen a date for providing such parity i.e. 21st June, 2007. As already noticed above, the relief of parity from any date prior can, at best, be granted only from the date of institution of the writ petition in view of the Division Bench judgment of this Court in the case of Private Secretaries Brotherhood . Therefore, what is required to be answered by the State Government is that as to what has happened between 1st January, 1996 to 21st June, 2007 on the basis whereof could it be said that the parity, which was earlier non-existing, has now come into existence on the basis whereof pay-scale of Rs. 6500-10,500 has been provided to the personal assistants working in the State Law Officers w.e.f. 21st June, 2007. The Chief Secretary, U.P Government at Lucknow must file an affidavit categorically stating (a) whether there has been change in the process of appointment on the post of personal assistants working in the office of U.P. State Law Officers both at Allahabad as well as Lucknow subsequent to 1st January, 1996, (b) whether there has been change in the essential qualification for appointment as personal assistants in the office of U.P. State Law Officers subsequent to 1st January, 1996, (c) whether there has been any change in the duties required to be discharged by the personal assistants subsequent to 1st January, 1996 and (d) whether there is any reasonable justification for not providing such equivalence from 1st January, 1996/date of institution of the present writ petition. Let the affidavit be filed alongwith report of the Vetan Samiti referred to above before this Court on 9th May, 2011. List this matter on 9th May, 2011.
(2.) From the aforesaid it is clear that the Chief Secretary was asked to file an affidavit justifying the non-payment of salary to the Petitioners at par with Personal Assistants working in the establishment of this High Court with effect from the date of the institution of the writ proceedings. The Court found that such parity in fact has been provided w.e.f. 21.6.2007. A pointed query was made as to what has happened between the date of filing of the writ petition and 21.6.2007 on the basis whereof such parity could be refused from the date as has been prayed in this petition.
(3.) Today an affidavit has been filed by the Chief Secretary and it has been stated that in respect of all the three issues so framed i.e. a, b and c, there has been no change between 16.12.1996 to 21.6.2007. Except for reiterating what has been stated earlier, no fresh material has been brought on record which can lead to a conclusion that the State is justified in not granting the parity in the pay scale from the date the writ petition was filed i.e. 16.12.1996 as has been done in the case of Private Secretaries Brotherhood and Ors. v. The State of U.P. & The Advocate General, U.P. (Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 17885 of 1996).;