The dispute concerned lower revised pay for earlier-appointed High Court staff than for new recruits. The court dismissed the State's appeals, leaving intact the protection of revised pay scales, prohibition on recovery and direction to refund recoveries already made.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Patna High Court LPA No.1094 of 2016 dt.28-10-2016
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Letters Patent Appeal No.1094 of 2016
.... .... Respondents
With
Patna High Court LPA No.1094 of 2016 dt.28-10-2016
2
| =========================================================== Letters Patent Appeal No. 1098 of 2016 |
|---|
| =========================================================== 1. The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Department of Finance, Bihar, Patna. |
| .... ....Appellant Versus 1. Prabhas Chandrakarn, Resident of Flat No. 590, L.B.S. Nagar, Patna 2. Krishna Murari Sharma, Resident of Indrapuri Road No. 9a/49 P.S.- Patliputra, Patna-24 3. Narendra Mohan Roy, Resident of Ramna Lane, Op. Muslim High School, Patna- 800004 4. Rajesh Kumar Dubey, Resident of Adalatganj P.S.- Kotwali, District- Patna 5. Dinesh Kumar Singh, Resident Of Patel Nagar, P.S.- L.B.S. Nagar, District- Patna 6. Pramod Kumar 2, null Resident of Indrapuri, P.S.- Patliputra, District- Patna 7. Sunil Kumar Tiwari, Resident of N. Nagar, P.S.- Patliputra, District- Patna 8. Manoj Kumar Sinha Resident of Tilaknagar, P.S.- Agamkuan, District- Patna 9. Arun Kumar Ranjan, IMC House Mainpura, Patliputra, Patna P.S. Patliputra, Patna 10. Sudhir Kumar Gupta Translator, Road No. 25 Rajiv Nagar Digha P.O. Keshari Nagar Patna P.S. Patliputra, Patna |
| 11. Binay Ranjan ASO, Criminal Disposal Section Patna High Court Patna Gardanibagh P.S. Gardanibagh Patna 12. Parshuram Singh ASO, Criminal Disposal Section, Patna High Court, Patna, Jakanpur, P.S. Jakkanpur, Patna 13. Prakash Ranjan Criminal Disposal Section Adalatganj P,S, Kotwali Disposal. 14. Sunil Kumar Puri, Adalatganj P.S.- Kotwali, District- Patna 15. Rajendra Prasad Gupta, Jakkanpur P.S.- Jakkanpur, Patna 16. Faizul Haque, Resident of At Samanpura, P.O. B.V. College, P.S. Shastrinagar, District- Patna-14 17. Dhiraj Kumar Sinha, Flat No. 3, Block No. 1, Adalatganj, Budh Marg, Patna, P.O.- G.P.O., Thana Kotwali, District- Patna 18. Navin Kumar Mishra, null Rajeev Nagar Thana Rajeev Nagar District- Patna 19. Smt. Veena Singh, Friends Colony Bailey Road Thana Kotwali District- Patna 20. Rajneesh Ranjan, Assistant, Statistical Section Address C/28, Mitramandal Colony Anisabad, Patna 21. Jitendra Kumar Jha, Assistant First Appeal Section Address Gopal Dham Niwas Hanuman Nagar New Punaichak, Patna 22. Dilip Kumar Sinha, Assistant First Appeal Section Address Punaichak, Mohanpur, Patna-23 23. Umesh Kumar, Barewa P.S. Dhaka District- East Champaran 24. Bhawanand Mishra, Indrapuri P.S. Patliputra, District- Patna 25. Shailendra Kumar, Resident of Anisabad P.S. Anisabad District- Patna 26. Usha Kumari, Resident of Ramjechak, P.S.- Digha, District- Patna 27. Ashish Kumar Singh, Resident of BBS Lane P.S. Alamganj Patna 28. Rajiv Ranjan Sahay, Resident of Q.No.C/12 Wt. P.S.- Kotwali, Patna 29. Ajay Kumar Jha, Resident of Flat No. 555 L.B.S. Nagar Patna 30. Mumtaz Shareen, Resident of B/43 Alinagar Anisabad, Patna |
Patna High Court LPA No.1094 of 2016 dt.28-10-2016
3
Patna High Court LPA No.1094 of 2016 dt.28-10-2016
4
Patna High Court LPA No.1094 of 2016 dt.28-10-2016
5
Patna High Court LPA No.1094 of 2016 dt.28-10-2016
6
Patna High Court LPA No.1094 of 2016 dt.28-10-2016
7
Patna High Court LPA No.1094 of 2016 dt.28-10-2016
8
.... .... Respondent/s =========================================================== Appearance : (In LPA No.1094 of 2016) For the Appellant/s : Mr. Kaushal Kumar Jha, AAG8 Mr. Amish Kumar, JC to AAG8 For Respondents No.1 to 19 : Mr. Vinod Kanth, Sr.Adv. Mr. Kumar Kaushik, Adv. For UOI : Mr. Rajesh Kumar Verma, Adv. For the Respondent High Court Mr. Bindhyachal Singh, Adv. (In LPA No.1098 of 2016) For the Appellant/s : Mr. Kaushal Kumar Jha, AAG8 Mr. Amish Kumar, JC to AAG8 For the respondents : Mr. Abhinav Srivastava, Adv. For UOI : Mr. Rajesh Kumar Verma, Adv. For the Respondent High Court : Mr. Bindhyachal Singh, Adv. =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SAMARENDRA PRATAP SINGH CAV JUDGMENT
(Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SAMARENDRA PRATAP SINGH) Date: 28-10-2016
As the issues involved in these appeals are similar, the
same were heard together and are being disposed of by this common order.
Patna High Court LPA No.1094 of 2016 dt.28-10-2016
9
directed against the order, dated 17.12.2015 passed by the learned Single Judge in C.W.J.C. No.12641 of 2013 and C.W.J.C. No.12077 of 2013, whereby the letter No.15777, dated 7.11.2012 issued by the Principal Secretary, Finance Department by which a direction was given to the concerned authorities not to provide the pay slab of Schedule-II of 6th Pay Revision against the norms of Pay Revision Committee and Policy decision of Government as the pay slab of Schedule-II is applicable to the employees appointed on or after 1.1.2006, has been quashed. Learned Single Judge further directed that the petitioners will draw the pay-scale which they were getting in terms of the recommendations of the Pay Revision Committee without any let or hindrance and no recovery shall also be made and if already made, will be ordered to be refunded.
(i) Issuance of a direction, order, writ including writ in the nature of certiorari quashing the letter dated 7.11.2012 issued by the State of Bihar in its Department of Finance by which, inter alia, it has been directed that such persons whose revision of salary has been done in terms of the 6th Pay Commission w.e.f. 1.1.2006, as per its Schedule-II, the actual payments made after the said revision be recovered from such persons in two installments and furthermore, it had been directed that actual payment of salary be doe from the month of December,2012 after making in appropriate correction in the revision of salary of such persons;
(ii) Issuance of a direction, order, writ including a writ
Patna High Court LPA No.1094 of 2016 dt.28-10-2016
10
in the nature of mandamus commanding the concerned respondent authorities to take steps towards extending the benefits of revision of pay-scale implemented w.e.f. 1.1.2006 treating the petitioners notionally to be entitled for the payment of salary in the pre-revised pay-scale as on 1.1.2006 as Rs.7450-11500, which is corresponding pre-revised pay scale to the Grade Pay 4600 granted to them w.e.f. 1.1.2006 and accordingly, extend all the consequential benefits including arrears of salary, etc;
(iii) Issuance of an ad interim order directing the concerned respondent authorities to refrain from acting in furtherance of the directions contained under the impugned letter dated 7.11.2012 issued by the State of Bihar in its Department of Finance”
Patna High Court LPA No.1094 of 2016 dt.28-10-2016
11
Central Secretariat Services w.e.f. 1.1.2006, which is appended to first schedule to the aforesaid notification (Annexure-2 to the writ petition). In the meantime, the Ministry of Finance, Government of India received a large number of complaints and references with respect to anomalies in fixation of some of the pay scales
Patna High Court LPA No.1094 of 2016 dt.28-10-2016
12
recommendation by the Union Government to the employees of the Central Government, the employees of the State of Bihar also raised similar demand and an agreement was arrived at between the employees Union and the State of Bihar. The State of Bihar agreed to extend the benefit of Central Pay on similar pattern to Assistant and Personal Assistant, as admissible to their Central Secretariat counterpart. Consequently, the Pay Revision Committee constituted by the State of Bihar in its interim report recommended the benefit of Central Pay w.e.f. 1.1.2006 to the Assistant working in the Bihar Secretariat or holder of equivalent post. The replacement scale was worked out by multiplying the existing pay scale by a factor of 1.86 and then adding the Grade Pay to it for fixation of pay. For instance, if the earlier unrevised pay was Rs.5500 on 1.1.2006, the replacement would be 5500 x 1.86, which is equivalent to 10,230 + Grade Pay of Rs.4200 which comes to Rs. 14,430. The said pay became the entitlement of Assistant as per Schedule-I of the notification. As per Schedule-II, the entry pay for the new entrance was fixed at Rs.13,500. The Assistant/Personal Assistant/ Translator etc. of the Patna High Court and the Assistant working in the Secretariat started getting their salary in the pay scale from the month of March, 2009 and in the new pay band by calculating their salary as on
Patna High Court LPA No.1094 of 2016 dt.28-10-2016
13
1.1.2006 by multiplier factor as noticed above. The Pay Band corresponding to Rs. 7450-11500 was fixed on Rs.9300-34800.
Patna High Court LPA No.1094 of 2016 dt.28-10-2016
14
Single Judge accepted the submissions of the writ petitioners. The learned Single Judge while allowing the writ applications took the view that the pay recommendation of the special body like the Pay Revision Committee cannot be likely to be interfered or replaced by a notification issued by an executive
in a casual manner. Secondly, because of such recommendation all these persons were drawing the replacement scale in the Grade Pay of Rs. 4600 from the year 2009 uninterruptedly till the issuance of the impugned notification. Learned Single Judge also took the view that two different scales of pay is impermissible to same set of employees performing similar work more so when they are in service from an earlier date. Such discrimination of Grade Pay would create a class amongst class.
Patna High Court LPA No.1094 of 2016 dt.28-10-2016
15
the cadre. The aforesaid facility has been provided to avoid any discrimination amongst the employees of the same cadre who were appointed before 1.1.2006. It was next submitted by the State that the letter, dated 7.11.2012 and applicability of Schedule-II of resolution dated 21.1.2010 are completely in accordance with norms of recommendation of Central Pay Commission and the State Pay Commission. Further more, the appellants have not interfered or changed any principle of pay scale and norms of policy decision by any executive order rather as per the norms of Pay Revision Committee and the Policy decision of the Government, the pay scale of ScheduleII were provided to the employees who were appointed prior to 1.1.2006 in certain departments which were restricted by letter dated 7.11.2012, and a direction was given to re-fix the pay scale and recover the excess amount paid to such employees in which there is no illegality and infirmity at all.
“21. That it is pertinent to mention here that the normal replacement scale of unreserved pay scale of Rs.5500-9000/- and is P.B.-2 and grade pay 4200/-. The Secretariat Assistant/Personal Assistant cadres have been granted revised Grade Pay of Rs.4600/in P.B.-2 for their unrevised pay scale of Rs.55009000/-. This is a specific post oriented revised pay band and grade pay. The reference of pay scale of
Patna High Court LPA No.1094 of 2016 dt.28-10-2016
16
7450-11500/- is unwarranted and misleading. For replacement of pre-revised pay scale Rs.745011500/- in P.B.-2 and Grade Pay 4600/- there is a special fitment table no. 21 which is not applicable in case of Secretariat Assistants/P.As./Translators because they were never in Pay Scale of Rs.745011500/- before 01.01.2006. Annexure: 8 of the writ application is bonafide clarification of Ministry of Finance, Department of Expenditure and Implementation Cell, Government of India, Department of Personnel and Training, Government of India in their file had requested the Cell to clarify the manner in which pay of Assistants/P.As. is to be fixed consequent upon the grant of revised pay structure of grade pay of 4600/- in P.B.-2 to them. The Cell issued clarification that no benefit of bunching is admissible in case of revision of pay in revised pay structure in pay band P.B.,-2 with grade pay 4600 for pre-revised scale of 5500-9000/-
22. That it is relevant to mention here that the scale of the cadre of the petitioners were historically lower than the scale of supervisors appointed on the basis of graduate level competitive examination, but it is only after the adopting of Central Pay scales as recommended by Fitment Committee it has become higher, not only at the initial recruitment stage but more so is the promotional scales.”
on going through the materials on record, we are unable to appreciate that the persons who are holding the posts of Assistant/ Personal Assistant/Translator in the establishment of the Patna High Court and appointed prior to 1.1.2006 would be paid in a lower Grade Pay than the persons newly recruited to the aforesaid posts on or after 1.1.2006. The stand of the State that there is a provision in the resolution, dated 7.12.2012 to
Patna High Court LPA No.1094 of 2016 dt.28-10-2016
17
step up the pay scales to the amount equal to the newly recruited persons in the cadre would be no solution to the discrimination meted to Assistant/ Personal Assistant/ Translator appointed prior to 1.1.2006.
8. The problem arose when the Department of Finance, Government of Bihar, started rethinking if not overreaching the recommendation already notified. They started making a distinction between the Assistants appointed on or after 1.1.2006 and those before. The post 1.1.2006 appointees were extended entry pay of Rs.17140/- and the Grade Pay of Rs.4600/-. The ground of the entry pay worked out to 40% of the higher slab of Rs.11500 in the replacement scale of Rs.7450-11500/-. Therefore, the salary was increased from Rs.13500/- to Rs.17140/-. This upgraded benefit of pay-scale was not extended to the Assistants/Personal Assistants appointed before 1.1.2006. Their salary was fixed on 1.1.2006 by treating the existing basic pay to be Rs.5500/- and not Rs.7450/- because of the salary of the Assistants appointed before 1.1.2006 added up to Rs.14,430/-. This has created an anomalous situation because if the scale was upgraded and
Patna High Court LPA No.1094 of 2016 dt.28-10-2016
18
benefit was to accrue, it should have been extended across the board and a different class amongst class ought not to have been created by giving higher benefit to Assistants appointed after 1.1.2006 and those appointed pre 1.1.2006.
(Samarendra Pratap Singh, J)
(I.A. Ansari, CJ)
Md. Jamaluddin Khan U
(I.A. Ansari, CJ)
2 issues framed by the court
Could High Court Assistants, Personal Assistants and Translators appointed before 1.1.2006 receive lower grade pay than those recruited on or after that date?
Did provision for stepping up pay upon fresh recruitment cure the discriminatory treatment of earlier appointees?
The State of Bihar through the Chief Secretary, Government of Bihar, Patna
The Principal Secretary, Finance Department, Government of Bihar, Patna
The Joint Secretary, Finance Department, Government of Bihar, Patna
Navin Kumar
Mritunjay Kumar
Rahesh Ranjan
I.A. Ansari
Samarendra Pratap Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
