Mahabir Singh and Others vs The State of Haryana and Others

K. Kannan, J.—In both the writ petitions, the grievance is that the Assistant Storekeeper, who was on scale of Rs. 950-1,500, after a promotion to a Storekeeper, is also put in the same scale. The counsel would argue that the promotion ought to mean improvement in service condition and promotion itself has, at all times, reckoned as going to improve the morale of the employees. The counsel would refer to the observations of the Division Bench of this Court in Sunder Lal Jain Versus State of Haryana - 1995 (1) SCT 564 to a similar situation where if there was no increase in the emoluments of a citizen on his promotion, the Bench observed that no one would work with zeal and dedication nor would he like to acquire better experience and more qualifications. The Bench was giving direction for setting right the anomaly. The learned counsel for the respondents would argue that an anomaly could exist only if the promotion post carries a lower scale and if the scale was at par, there is no anomaly. I reject this contention and hold that it would be meaningless to afford a person a promotion if it only means a difference in designation. The scales cannot be the same and the Government shall consider the same and fix appropriate scales commensurate with the work and responsibility in the higher post. The anomaly is said to be prevalent from 01.01.1986. It has been laid down in several decisions that the Courts are not expert bodies to fix scales of pay. Any anomalies have to be corrected only through representations to State Pay Commission or by the authorities themselves reworking appropriate scales. I direct that the State shall take up this issue and rectify the same by passing an appropriate order within a period of 4 months from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

Both the writ petitions are allowed subject to the above directions.