Dismissed

Iqbal Singh and Ors. v. State of Haryana and Ors.

Punjab & Haryana HC7 Feb 2011CWP/15806/2009

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners, Constable Drivers in the Haryana Police Telecommunication Wing, sought equal pay with Civil Branch drivers and quashing of orders denying promotion. The single-judge court rejected the claim, holding that promotion avenues exist via nominal rank conferment with ACP scales.

What did the court decide?

The petition was held to be without merit and dismissed.

Iqbal Singh and Ors. Vs State of… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Punjab & Haryana HC (2011)

¶1

247

¶2

¶3

CWR Nol5806 of2009 1e

¶4

INTHE FUGH COURT OF PUNJAB 8 HARYA AT^CHANDIGARH 1 CWP No 15806of2009 DATEOF^DECISION 2 3 e 2 2 0 1 1 IqbalSingh^{and others} PETITIONERS l 0 VERSUS 0 I State and others RESPONDENTS 0 I Z CORAM HONBLE MRJUSTICE MAHESH GROVER 2 I Presentl ShriPuneetBali Advocatefor thepetitioners C Z ShriHarishRatheeSeniorDAG CO W2 Z MAHESH GROVER J The petitionersby^{virtueof the} present^writ petition^have prayed^for quashing^the impugned^ordersdated 276006 and 2922006 attached^as AnnexuresP12 and P43 andhavealso prayedthattheybe granted promotionin accordancewith the PunjabPolice Rules^or lll the alternativebe grantedthe^same payscale^aSlS beinggivento the personsworkingin the other 1 Civil ofthe Govemment Sahil Soni Batra Amit They^contendthat they to the advertisementissued by 2016.03.21 12:26I attest to the accuracy and the 2014.04.21 14: 35TRUE SCANNED COPY OF ORIGNAL integrity of this document PHHC CHANDIGARH in the year 1989aimedat ftllingup 3500vacanciesof Constablesin

248

0 CO I t5 I Z

I Z

QO em Z

CWR Nol5806 of2009

the Anned Police andWirelessSection They^were successfuland^were selectedandrecruited^as ConstableDriversby the ofPoliceIRer their^{recruitmentinDistrictJind} they^{weretransfeuedtotheTelecommunication} Wing^{ofHaryanaPolicePanchkulawhichisaseparatewingofthePolice} withits at Panchkula

¶13

That^the petitionerswhile workingas ConstableDriverswere placed in^the of Rs501800 The Driversin other such^as Home Guardsetc andothercivil were drawinga payscaleof Rsl2002040 Some^{ofthe ConstableDrivers 81edCWR} N0164410f1993which^was allowed by a Division Bench of this Court on 1651994 with a direction^to the to grantthe pay scaleof Rsl2002040 to the Constable Driverswho^were workingin theHaryanapoliceThe Statewentⁱⁿ S1R against theorder of the Division Bench whereintheyraised a pleathat the Constable Drivers cannot be givenparitywith other Drivers because in the Police the^avenues of furtherpromotionare availablewhich is not available to any other During^thecourse of^the before the Court^an affldavit^was also81edbythe supponingtheir plearegardingthe availability^of avenues to theConstable Drivers workingin thePolice TheSLP was thus andthejudgment of the Division Bench^was set aside on 1181997 Despite^{the aforesaidthe} avenues were not madeavailable^to thepetitionersand were madeurgingthe to grantthemthe avenues The said was rejectedandwhile passingthe order it^was admittedthat avenues are availableonly to the ConstableDrivers who^were promoted^to the ranks of Head ConstableslAssistantSub but^no such^avenues were availableto theConstableDriversandthat

¶14

such

¶15

have^no chancesof furtherpromotionwithout converslon

¶16

Sahil Soni 2016.03.21 12:26 to I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶17

Batra Amit 2014.04.21 14: 35 TRUE SCANNED COPY OF ORIGNAL PHHC CHANDIGARH

¶18

249

¶19

4 CW^P No5806^of2009

¶20

¶21

m Ct 0 U I C5 I Z rL I L2 Z C0 I7 Z Qw

¶22

trade It is alsothe^case of the thatthe afOdavit^was flled with^{wrongavennentsandinordertocoverup the lapseletterdated2211996} was making^a provisionfor test of the ConstableDrivers if they^were desirousof conversionto trade which demandedan to go

¶23

thevarioustechnical^coulses

¶24

writ petitionie CWP N05626 of 2004 followedmaking the^{samegrjevance} that the ConstableDrivers^were denied the^aVenUeS Of This writ petitionwas defeatedbythe byOling^awriuen whereintheypleadedthat dated1232003hadbeensent^to the Director Generalof Police for of^the postof^{ConstableDriversto the} rankof Head for further avenuesand the

¶25

same was pendingconsiderationwith the StateGovemment For thepurpose therelevant ofthe writtenstatementOledbeforethisCoun in^theaforesaid writ petition^is below^l

¶26

That in reply^{to para} 80fthe^writ petitionit is submittedthat while filingthe replyof the said SLP the Under Secretary Home had adduced^an affidavit in which the avenues of ConstablesDrivers^were shownin the rankof Head ConstablesASI and SI^etc but in fact there existsno postofHC ASI SI^or etc in thetradeof drivers in telecomwingand as a resultthesepostshaveno further chances of promotion^without converslOll 10 trade To^remove deadlockin theirpromotionand to honourthe commitmentmadebythe StateGovemmentin reply^{ofthe aforesaidSLPitisstatedthatthe} promotionof

¶27

constabledrivers^can onlybe madeeitherby^converslon 111

¶28

Sahil Soni 2016.03.21 12:26 trade^or byway of of their posts^to I attest to the accuracy and the integrity of this document

¶29

Batra Amit 2014.04.21 14: 35 TRUE SCANNED COPY OF ORIGNAL PHHC CHANDIGARH

250

CWP Nol5806 of2009

1 r O 0

C5 I Z

C Z m 7 Z

rank ofHC ASI SI andInspectorA separateproposalwas also sent to DGPHaryanavide IGPITe1eOmceNoA291Tele dated to get theseposts is that 61rther could be openedfor constabledrivers Thisproposalisundertheconsiderationofthe StateGovt

¶37

The^writ petitionwas thus of by^{thisCoun with adirection} that^{aflnaldecision with} regard^to the^matter will^betaken by^theState Govemmentwithin^a peri6dof^{six monthsfromthedate} of passing^{of theorderin} View ofthejudgmentof^theHonble SupremeCourtandtheaffldavitSled bythe StateGovemmentin the connectedmatter The relevantportionof the orderis given^herebelow

¶38

We disposeof^this petition^{withadirectionthat}

¶39

the final decisionwith regardto this matter will be takenby the^{StateGovernmentwithinsixmonthsfrom} today^inthe light^{ofthejudgment} of^{the Honble} SupremeCourt and the affidavit filed by the State Govemmentin this connected matter

¶40

reminders^were sent to the pursuant^to the

¶41

standtakenby them in the aforesaid^writ petitionbut the were

¶42

by^{theGovemment videthe} impugnedorderdated2762006 whichorder is hereinandis attached^as Annexure P12 It^was statedin this order thattheConstableDriversof theTelecommunicationWing^are in^a betterposition

¶43

as compared^to the Drivers in the civil and there^are

¶44

facilities available to them Since the stand taken in Sahil Soni 2016.03.21 12:26 Batra Amit2014.04.21 14: 35TRUE SCANNED COPY OF ORIGNALAnneuxreP2 was contraryto the one whichtakenbythe beforethis I attest to the accuracy andintegrity of this document PHHC CHANDIGARH

251

1 0 0 I C5 I Z 0 I Z

QO amo Z

CWR N015806of2009

Courtin CWP N05626 of 22004 ContemptPetitionNol152 of 2006^was In the affldavit filed in response^to the ContemptPetition the that the proposal the of^the postof Driver to Head Constableetc as was beforethis Coun in CWP^No626 of^{2004wasincorrectandthattheDirectorGeneralofPolicehad}

¶52

sent the proposalto theGovernmentwhichwas rejected

¶53

An affldavit^was also filed by Shri SelvrajIPS IGR Telecommunications Panchkulain which it was statedthat in the TelecommunicationWingthe ConstableDrivershavegot avenues after of^{1630 and35years} of^serviceas ExempteeHead Constables ASI ExempteeSIs Theseranksdid not entail any Onancialbenefitto the promotee^as theonlyfinancialbenefitsavailable^to them^were in theform of theACP^{scalesofferedtothemafter10and20years} ofregular^service The standofthe obviouslywas an attemptto oveneachtheCoun andthus this^{alsodidnotfindfavourwith theCourtThusShriBalbir} Singh^DlG who had^{earlierftledtheaffldavittenderedanunconditional} apologyandthecontempt were droppedThe petitionersthen theHonble Supreme Court and since the S1P filed by the was also decided^on the basisof wrong projectionmade^to the Court that avenues were availablethe said applicationwas howeverwithdrawnwith libertyto takeany action as may be advisedin accordancewith law The petitionerl then filed Clvl ApplicationNo849 of 2009 in CWP N05626 of 2004 for recallingtheorder which^was dismissed ThereaRer^some techniciansworkingin thePolice this Coun by OllingCWP NoS327 of 2006 andprayedfor grantofpayscaleofRs2002040 This writ petitionwas allowed

¶54

¶55

by^thisCourt against^{which theState} of Haryanafiled^an SP bearingNol8631 Sahil Soni 2016.03.21 12:26 Batra Amit2014.04.21 14: 35TRUE SCANNED COPY OF ORIGNALof 2007 This SLP was dismissed The petitionersthen Oled W Nol470 I attest to the accuracy andintegrity of this document PHHC CHANDIGARH

252

1 0 C I C5 I

OO n7 Z

CWP No 15806of2009

of^{2009but sincetherewereinadvertentmistakesinthe} petition^thesamewas

¶66

with libertyto file^a freshpetitionandtheinstant writ petitionhasbeen

¶67

filed^{withtheprayerashasbeen} in the

¶68

Thepetitionersthuspray

¶69

¶70

That there^are no avenuesavailable^to them in the

¶71

TelecommunicationWing

¶72

21 They^{begrantedthesamepayscale ashas been} ed to the

¶73

Driversin thecivil ofthe StateGovernment

¶74

31 Theprincipleofequal^payfor equal^{work demandsthatthesamepay}

¶75

scalebemadeadmissible^to thepersonswhoperfonnsimilarduties

¶76

41 That the provisionof providing avenues as Exemptee

¶77

Head SIsis merelyan eye washandtheydo

¶78

notentail

¶79

any financialbeneOts

¶80

51 Thatthestandofthe isviolativeofArticles 14and16of

¶81

theConstitutionofIndia

¶82

Reliance^was placed^on ajudgmentofthis Coun in CWP No10074

¶83

of 2010 Reference^was also madeto thecommunicationissuedby the Stateof Haryana

¶84

in responseto thevarious writ petitionsdecidedbythisCoun whereinthe Stateof Haryanahasdecidedto grantthe benefitsof pay scaleof Rsl2002040 notionallywith effectfrom 151990 to those whose were not Ivlatricwith ITl appointedprior^to151990on a technicalpost whose is Matric with LTl

¶85

Upon^{noticeofmotion} having^{been issuedthe} have

¶86

filed theirreplyand it hasbeenpleadedthatthepetitionersandother of theTeleconications Wing^were getting^{thefacilitieswhich their} counteroans

¶87

in thecivil

¶88

are not gettingThe detailsof suchbenefltsare as under

¶89

Sahil Soni 2016.03.21 12:26 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶90

Pay^of

¶91

Batra Amit 2014.04.21 14: 35 TRUE SCANNED COPY OF ORIGNAL PHHC CHANDIGARH

253

CWR Nol5806 of2009

1 r

0 0 I C5 I

Z m V2 Z

BasicPay 79601 Sp^pay 60 HRA 7961 KMA 1001 CA 1201 RME 5001

¶102

Additionalpay8421pm

¶103

Otherbenefltsfor policeofficialsonly

¶104

il Susidised in HaryanaBus at^a tlxed monthly rateofRs801 pm iil Interestfreewelfareloanfacility iiil Subsidisedmessingfacility ivl Freebarrackaccommodation

¶105

It^was pleadedthattheHaryanaPoliceTelecommunicationWingis^a technicalwingwhich is separatefromthe GeneralPolice cadreandthe cadrehas remainedseparatefromtheverybeginningIt^was alsopleadedby^{themthatthere} are avenues of promotionby promoting^{these Driversas} Exemptee^Head SIsand till date 81 Constableshavebeen promotedas ExempteeHead SIs even thoughthey^donot get^{anyfinancialbene8tfromthesame} They^obtainthe financialbenefitsbybeinggrantedIstACP of RsAOOO0000^on completionof¹⁰ years serviceandalsoget2ndACP of Rs50007850 aRercompletion of 20 yearsofservice It^wasnext contendedthatthisverystand^was takenwhile respondingto thecontemptpetitionflled bythe petitionersearlierandthattheACP grantedto thepersonssimilarlyplacedas thepetitionersis equivalentto thepayof Sahil Soni Batra Amit2014.04.21 14: 35a regularHead ConstableIASI It was thus prayedthat the writ petitionbe TRUE SCANNED COPY OF ORIGNAL PHHC CHANDIGARH

¶106

Sahil Soni 2016.03.21 12:26 I attest to the accuracy and be integrity of this document

254

CWR Nol5806^of2009

1 r 0 0 I 0 I

Z 2

I Co Z

0 17 Z Om

dismissed

I have heardthe leamedcounselfor the paniesand perusedthe

¶116

material^on record

¶117

Even thoughthenarrationgivenin thepetitionis of^facts yet^the controversycan be statedjustln one line thatthepetitionersdemandthe pay equivalentto theDriverswho are workingin thecivil and plead thatthe avenues is violativeofthe Anicle 16ofthe Constitutionof Indiaand thattheyshouldbe grantedequalpay to the one which is beinggivelto the similarlysituatedpersons the^same dutiesin anotherwingofthe Govemment

¶118

On dueconsiderationI do not find any meritin thepleawhich has beenraisedbythepetitioners

¶119

The principleof equal^{pay for} equal^work certainlyenvisagesthat two persons similardutiesand similarlyplacedbe treated 0p eee r and not But at the^same time it is the Govemmentwho hasto detenninethefact whethersuchpersons^are the^same nature of dutiesandshouldbe held entitledto the^same pay scale^or not A postmaybe of the same nomenclaturebutmayentaildifferentduties A Driver engagedbay^the Anned Forcesmaybe requiredto do^amore hazardousdutythantheDriver who hasbeenengagedin^a

¶120

It wouldthusbe absurdto simplyequatetwo posts^on thebasisof^a nomenclatureThe pleaof the petitionersdeservesto be negatedon the other ground^{alsobecausethe} have statedthatthe Constable Driversin the wing^{which isa} separate^{cadreand a} separate wing^are beingpromotse Head

¶121

SIs^even thoughtheydo not carry any SnanciaIbenets byconfermentof^sucha

¶122

status on them yet theyhave been grantedthe ACP afler 10 and 20 years of

¶123

Sahil Soni 2016.03.21 12:26I attest to the accuracy and of integrity of this document

¶124

Batra Amit 2014.04.21 14: 35 TRUE SCANNED COPY OF ORIGNAL PHHC CHANDIGARH

255

1 0 U I C5 I Z

Z m

VA Z

1V CWP No5806^of2009

service which^are in the of^{RsA0006000 andRs58507000 which are}

¶132

to thepayscalesofHead ConstableandASI

¶133

The purposeof ACP is to eliminatestagnationin the serviceand where^evera personcannot be gmntedactualpromotionhe is grantedthe ACP scale^to compensatehim

¶134

That beingthe situation the petitionersinterest ls

¶135

as theynot onlygettherank butalsogetthepay aer the specifiednumberofyearsofservice

¶136

The pleaof the petitionerthus is misplacedand the

¶137

petitionis held to bewithoutany meritandis dismissed

¶138

4 re MAHESH GROVERI 23²⁰¹¹ JUDGE GD 1

¶139

WHETHER TO BE REFERREDTO REPORTER7YESINO

¶140

1lll
r
4
1
4

¶141

Sahil Soni 2016.03.21 12:26 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶142

Batra Amit 2014.04.21 14: 35 TRUE SCANNED COPY OF ORIGNAL PHHC CHANDIGARH

Iqbal Singh and Ors. v. State of Haryana and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Iqbal Singh and Ors. v. State of Haryana and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kavita Kumari and Anr. Vs State of Haryana and Ors.

Manju Vs State of Haryana and Others

Brijesh Sharma Vs State of Haryana & Ors.

Geeta Senior Secondary School Vs State of Haryana and Ors.

Maharaja Aggarsain Sr. Sec. School Vs State of Haryana & Ors.

Tara Chand and Anr. Vs Maharshi Dayanand Uni, Rohtak and Ors.