Grant Of Higher Pay Scale Only On The Basis Of Completion Of Some Years Of Service And Not Seniority Is Violative of Article 14 & 16: P&H HC Reiterates

A division bench of the Punjab and Haryana High Court comprising of Justice M.S. Ramachandra Rao and Justice Sukhvinder Kaur while deciding a Letters Patent Appeal (“LPA”) in the case of State of Punjab and others vs Dr. Ranjit Singh and others has held that grant of higher pay scale only on the basis of completion of some years of service and not seniority is violative of Article 14 & 16 of the Constitution of India

Background Facts

Dr. Ranjit and some other people (“Respondents”) were working as Agriculture Officers, PAS-II, in the Administrative Wing of the Department of Agriculture, Punjab. The Agriculture officers including the respondents vide notification dt.21.12.2011 were given different pay scales in a pay revision with effect from 01.12.2011 in the entry scale, and on completion of 4/9/14 years of service in the entry scale. They contended that the pay scales cannot be fixed differently in the same post on the basis of length of service

Prior to 1986, there were three classes of various officers belonging to the Punjab Agricultural Service i.e. Class I, II and III carrying different pay scales. All the three classes were merged into one cadre with segregation of pay scales into 3 classes: at the time of entry, after 8 years and after 18 years. However, by the notification dated 18.09.1992, an anomaly was created in the service and a junior started getting higher pay scale on the basis of his longer length of service although they were promoted after the seniors were recruited directly in service. The notification was challenged in Sarvjit Singh and others Vs. State of Punjab wherein the court held that there is no rationale as to why a Junior Agriculture Officer should get a higher pay than a senior; and the said notification insofar as it provided for grant of higher pay scale only on the basis of completion of 8/18 years of service and not seniority was held to be violative of Article 14 & 16 of the Constitution of India.

Subsequent thereto, on 21.04.1997 an order was issued by the Government of Punjab implementing the said judgment. It directed that all Class I and II officers belonging to the Administrative Wing of the Department of Agriculture, Punjab irrespective of their length of service would be granted the placement scales admissible to their juniors. In 2001, a notification dt.13.09.2001 was issued notifying the Punjab Civil Services (Revised Pay) (4th Amendment) Rules, 2001. It came into effect from 01.01.1996. In this notification, the pay scale of Rs.7220-11660 was fixed at the time of entry into service, Rs.10025-15100 after 6 years of service and Rs.12000-16350 after 16 years of service. The validity of the revised pay scales was contended by the respondent. They contended that the imposition of the condition of the completion of 4/9/14 years of service on the respondents is an arbitrary action of the appellants. The state however, contended that the judgment in Sarvjit Singh and others would not apply to the writ petitioners because pay scales were modified by the judgement in Dr.Naresh Kumar Kataria and others.

A writ petition was filed before the Punjab and Haryana High Court and Single Judge bench held that the orders passed allowing revised pay scale on the basis of the condition of completion of 4/9/14 years of service and not on the basis of seniority, violates the law laid down in Sarvjit Singh’s case. Aggrieved by the said order, the state has filed the writ appeal, called as Letters Patent Appeal to challenge the order of the Single Judge.

Findings of the Court

The court observed that the question whether a person who is senior can be denied the pay scale which has been granted to the junior on the ground that the said junior had been in longer period of service had been answered in a negative in Sarvjit Singh’s case. The notification dt.18.09.1992 which allowed the junior to be given a higher pay scale on completion of 8 years and 18 years of service was set aside. The said decision had also been held by the Supreme Court.

The court further observed that there was no consideration in Dr. Naresh Kumar Kataria and others of the issue raised in Sarvjit Singh’s case i.e. whether a person, who is senior, can be denied the pay scale which has been granted to the junior on the ground that the said junior has been in longer period of service. Therefore, the Single judge rightly distinguished the decision in Dr.Naresh Kumar Kataria and others from Sarvjit Singh’s case.

With the aforesaid observations, the Division Bench dismissed the appeal.

Case No: LPA-1423-2018

Case Name: State of Punjab and others vs Dr. Ranjit Singh and others

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (PH) 64

Counsel for Appellant: Mr.Aman Dhir, DAG, Punjab

Counsel for Respondents: Adv. Gurminder Singh, Adv. Jatinder Singh Gill

Click Here To Read/Download Order