V.K. Bali, J. - (1.) BY this common order, we propose to decide Letters Patent Appeal No. 725 of 1993 (H.S.M.I.T.C. and Ors. v. G.S. Uppal and Ors.) as also two connected Civil Writ Petitions bearing No. 5946 of 1994 (Chakarvarti Garg v. State of Haryana and Ors.) and 834 of 1996 (A.S. Dhir v. State of Haryana and Ors.), as common questions of law and fact are involved in all these petitions. The Civil Writ Petitions, mentioned above, were ordered to be heard along with LPA No. 725 of 1993. Learned Counsel representing the parties are also ad -idem that all these matters need to be disposed of by a common judgment. The facts have primarily been picked up from Letters Patent Appeal No. 725 of 1993 but some subsequent events, which could find mention only in the civil writ petitions that came to be filed later shall also be mentioned.
(2.) THE Respondents in LPA No. 725 of 1993 are employees of the Haryana State Minor Irrigation Tubewell Corporation (hereinafter referred to as the Corporation') and at the time when petition on behalf of the Petitioners came to be filed, they were working on the posts of Sub -Divisional Officers, Sub -Divisional Engineers and Assistant Engineers in the Corporation, which is a company registered under the Companies Act. It has been the case of the respondents (hereinafter referred to as the petitioners ) that the State of Haryana exercises deep and pervasive control over the Corporation. The Governor of Haryana ; Secretary to Government Haryana, Irrigation Department; Secretary to Government Haryana, Agricultural Department; Chairman, Haryana State Electricity Board; Secretary to Government Haryana, Finance Department; and Chief Engineer (Canals), Irrigation Works, Haryana, were the exclusive share holders in the Corporation at the time of its formation in the year 1970. The Corporation was carved out of the Irrigation and Power Ministry in the State of Haryana in the year 1970. Inasmuch as, the Corporation came to be carved out of the Irrigation Department, it had to be initially manned by the officers on deputation from the Irrigation Department to work on the posts of Sub -Divisional Officers, Sub -Divisional Engineers and Assistant Engineers. At the time, when the petition came to be file in the year 1992, there were 27 SD Os on deputation from the Irrigation Department. In the Corporation, the nature of duties and responsibilities of the deputationists and the SD Os of the Corporation was the same. Their duties were inter -changeable and as such it has been the case of the Petitioners that there was no difference whatsoever between the duties and responsibilities expected to be shouldered by a deputationist and by an S.D.O. of the Corporation. In fact, it has further been the case of the Petitioner that there was no qualitative difference between the duties and responsibilities of persons employed on the posts of S.D. Os, S.D. Es and A. Es. in various departments of Haryana Government, such as Public Works Department (Buildings and Roads), Public Health and also various Boards and Corporations, such as the Haryana State Electricity Board, the Haryana Urban Development Authority, etc. Rule 5.1 of Part v. of the Service Bye -laws of the Corporation reads as under: (1) Each post in the Corporation will carry a time scale of pay; the present pay scale being indicated in Appendix II. (2) The pay scale is subject to revision by the Board, which will, however, generally follow the pattern adopted by the Government of Haryana from time to time. Right since the inception of the Corporation in the year 1970, it has been following the pay scales adopted by the Haryana Government as revised from time to time in respect of all classes of its employees. As mentioned above, initially, when the Corporation was formed, almost entire engineering staff from the rank of Chief Engineer to the rank of Assistant Engineer/Sub -Divisional Officer was taken on deputation from the Irrigation Department, Haryana, till the Corporation recruited its own cadre of Assistant Engineers. Qualifications and experience for recruitment and promotion to the rank of Assistant Engineers, Sub Divisional Officer, Executive Engineers, Superintending Engineers and Chief Engineers are the same as in the Irrigation Department. All those, who came on deputation on whatsoever post, were granted pay scales as revised by the Haryana Government from time to time for the Engineers in the Government Department, like P.W.D., Public Health (B&R) and Irrigation Department. Keeping in view these facts and the established principle of equal pay for equal work, pay scales of employees of the Corporation, including those of Engineers, were revised with effect from 1st April, 1979 and 1st January, 1986 on the pattern of revision of pay scales approved by the Haryana Government for its Employees . The revision of pay scales with effect from 1st January, 1986 was also approved by the Pay Revision Committee constituted by the Haryana Government for revision of pay scales of the employees of various public undertakings/Boards/Corporations in its meeting dated 21st September, 1988. On the basis of Clause 81(v) of the Memorandum of Association of the Corporation oration, reproduced below, it has further been the case of the Petitioners that the Board of the Corporation has in its discretion the ultimate power to fix the salary and emoluments of the employees of the Corporation: 81(v) to appoint at their discretion, remove or suspend such managers, secretaries, officers, clerks, agents and servants for permanent, temporary or special services, as they may from time to time think fit, and to determine their powers and duties and fix their salaries or emoluments and to require security of such amount as they think fit in such instances. In the first instance, officers and other staff shall be taken on deputation from the Irrigation Department, Haryana, subject to availability.
(3.) ON the basis of Clause 95 of the Memorandum of Association dealing with power of Chairman of the Corporation, it has further been the case of the Petitioners that if the Chairman refers any proposal to the Government and the views of the Government with regard to the decision are not received within a period of two months, the Director shall be entitled to act in accordance with the proposal or decision without further reference to the Government.;