- (1.) The petitioners, who were working as Bill Distributors under the erstwhile Haryana State Electricity Board, instituted the present writ petition in the year 1992 claiming identical pay scale i.e. Rs.1200-2040 w.e.f. 1.5.1990 as had been granted to Carrier Attendants, Shift Attendants, Assistant Line Men and Laboratory Attendants (herein after to be referred as the reference posts). Petitioners also seek the quashing of order dated 30.7.1991 (Annexure P-4), whereby the pay scale of the posts of Bill Distributor has been revised from Rs.825-1300 to Rs.950-1500 instead of Rs.1200-2040.
(2.) Placed on record is a comparative table/tabulation at Annexure P-8 reflecting the pay scales admissible to the post of Bill Distributor and the reference posts w.e.f. 1.4.1979 onwards. A perusal of the same would undoubtedly reveal that the petitioners while holding the posts of Bill Distributor, as also the reference posts were placed in the identical pay scale of Rs.350-600 (Rs.400-700 selection grade for 20% posts) on 1.4.1979. In the subsequent revisions effected in the years 1986 the post of Bill Distributor as also the reference posts were granted the same pay scale i.e. Rs.800-1150 and thereafter, substituted to Rs.825-1300. However, the reference posts have been granted a higher pay scale of Rs.1200-2040 w.e.f. 1.5.1990, whereas the pay scale admissible to the post of Bill Distributor stands revised from Rs.825-1300 to that of Rs.950-1500 vide impugned order dated 30.7.1991 (Annexure P-4).
(3.) Mr. Suvir Sehgal, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would strenuously contend that a pay parity that held good between the posts of Bill Distributor and the reference posts from 1.4.1979 till 1.5.1990 could not have been broken and deviated from without any justifiable basis. It has been argued that the duties and responsibilities of the holders of the post of Bill Distributor has not, in any way, lessened over the years and as such the grant of a lower pay scale in comparison to the reference posts would be arbitrary and violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India. In support of such contention, reliance has been placed upon a decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of The Employees of Tannery and Footwear Corporation of India Ltd. and another Vs. Union of India and others, 1991 Supp2 SCC 565 and a Division Bench judgement rendered by this Court in case of Haryana State Biologists Association Vs. The State of Haryana, 1994 4 RSJ 444. Reliance has also been placed upon Circular No.70 dated 22.3.1991, issued by the Haryana State Electricity Board, Finance Section appended at Annexure R-1 along with the written statement to submit that the decision had been taken as regards admissibility of the modified pay scale of Rs.1200-2040 to all the existing employees irrespective of the fact whether they are Matric with I.T.I Certificate/Polytechnic or not. Mr. Sehgal would argue that the benefit of the Circular dated 22.3.1991 would also be available to the petitioners and to the holders of the post of Bill Distributor. In this regard counsel would place reliance on judgement dated 18.1.2010 passed by this Court in CWP No. 18754 of 1991 titled as Gurdev Singh and others Vs. State of Haryana and others and other connected petitions.;