Shiv Kumar Kapil & Others vs North Delhi Municipal Corporation & Others

L. Narasimha Reddy, J

Through this common order, we propose to dispose of OA No.762/2019 and OA No.1705/2019. Common questions of facts and law are involved in

them.

The applicants are working as Assistant Librarians, in the North Delhi Municipal Corporation. It is stated that in 1988, the Assistant Librarians were

extended the pay scale of Teachers, working in the Corporation and that the same is being continued over the years. The corporation issued an order

dated 06.08.2018 proposing to revise the pay structure for the post of Assistant Librarian and to dissociate the same with the pay scale of the

Teachers. A consequential order was issued on 23.01.2019. This OA is filed challenging the order dated 23.01.2019.

The applicants contend that the arrangement was in force from 1988 and the periodical enhancements were also taking place as and when the

recommendations of the Pay Commissions were being implemented. They submit that the impugned order was passed without any authority, and that

it is contrary to law.

The respondents filed a detailed counter affidavit. It is stated that though the uniformity of pay scales for the post of Teacher and the Assistant

Librarians was ordered in 1988, the subsequent revision of pay scales resulted in a situation where a substantial disparity is noticed and that taking all

these aspects into account, the impugned order was passed.

We heard Shri Ranjit Sharma and Shri Ajesh Luthra, learned counsel for the applicants and Shri R. V. Sinha and Shri R. K. Jain, learned counsel

for the respondents.

It is not in dispute that the posts of Assistant Librarians in the respondent corporation were extended the pay attached to the post of Teachers in

1988. This is in force for the past several decades. In case the respondents have any valid reason for revising it, the minimum requirement in law was

to put the affected persons on notice. Admittedly, no notice was issued to the applicants before the impugned order was passed. Though it is argued

by the learned counsel for the respondents that the issue can be adjudicated in view of the fact that the reasons are spelt out in counter affidavit, we

are not inclined to accept that contention. Any amount of subsequent explanation will not cure the defect that crept in on account of the violation of

principles of natural justice.

We, therefore, allow the OA and set aside the impugned order dated 23.01.2019. We leave it open to the respondents to issue show cause notice to

the applicants within two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The applicants shall have two weeks time to submit reply. The order

in that behalf shall be passed within four weeks thereafter. The existing arrangements as regards the pay structure shall be treated purely tentative

and subject to the orders that may be passed. The exercise shall be completed within two months from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

It is stated that the applicant in OA No.1705/2019 is getting the salary which he was being paid prior to the impugned order. The applicant in OA

No.762/2019 shall be extended the same benefit from February, 2021 onwards. This shall be, however, subject to the outcome of the orders that may

be passed.

Pending MAs, if any, shall stand disposed of.

There shall be no order as to costs.