Nafr High Court · 1984
Case Details
1 Reserved on – 02.07.2025 Delivered on- 26.09.2025 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WP No. 598 of 2006 1 - Ram Kumar Verma S/o Late P.R. Verma, aged about 62 Years, Occupation Plumber, S.D.O. Public Health Engineering Sub Division Bilaspur, District- Bilaspur (C.G.) versus ... Petitioner 1. State of Chhattisgarh through Secretary Engineering D.K.S. Bhawan Raipur, (C.G.) 2. Engineer in Chief Public Health Engineer, Raipur, Kalimandir District- Raipur (C.G.) 3. Executive Engineer Public Health Engineering, Composite Building Bilaspur, (C.G. ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner
Legal Reasoning
: Mr. Anshuman Shrivastava, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Ms. Nupur Sonkar, PL Hon'ble Shri Justice Sachin Singh Rajput CAV Judgment 1. The petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking for the following relief(s); 1) A writ in the nature of mandamus may be issued directing the Respondent to give him the pay scale of mechanic/hand pump technician. 2) Respondent may be directed to pay the arrears of the difference of the pay scale as a mechanic/hand pump technician since the initial date of joining that is 16 May 1984 or since the date of posting as a work charged that is 6/6/95. 2. The fact which emerges from the pleadings are that the petitioner joined the services of the respondents in the year 1984 as a Helper on daily wages. Thereafter, he was promoted as Plumber with effect from 01.05.1987. He was placed under work-charge on the same post on 06.06.1995. Further pleadings 2 reflect that since his initial appointment, the petitioner was performing the duties of a Mechanic/Hand Pump Technician, and his salary was being drawn against the Hand Pump Maintenance Head. The pay scale of a Mechanic is Rs. 3500-5200, whereas the petitioner was paid the pay scale of a Plumber, i.e., Rs. 2650-3500. 3. It is further the case of the petitioner that certain employees, namely, Shri Vijendra Kumar Das and Shri Ram Chandra Patel, who are junior to the petitioner and had joined service, were being paid the pay scale of Mechanic/Hand Pump Technician. The petitioner submitted several representation in this regard but to no avail. It is also the case of the petitioner that Respondent No. 3 recommended the grant of the pay scale of Mechanic/Hand Pump Technician in his favour to Respondent No. 2, yet the said pay scale was not extended to him. Hence, the present petition has been filed. 4. The respondents/State have filed their return. It is submitted that the promotion of the petitioner to the post of Plumber on the basis of his ITI certificate is a matter of record. The petitioner’s representations have been denied. It is specifically denied that the petitioner was working as Mechanic/Hand Pump Technician. According to the respondents, the petitioner continues to work as Plumber. The contention that juniors of the petitioner were paid the pay scale of Mechanic/Hand Pump Technician has also been denied. It is further submitted that the recommendations made in favour of the petitioner were erroneous, and a mere recommendation does not entitle him to the pay scale of Mechanic/Hand Pump Technician. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner reiterated the submissions in line with the
Decision
pleadings of the writ petition. He contended that the documents annexed with 3 the writ petition clearly establish that the petitioner was in fact performing the duties of a Mechanic/Hand Pump Technician. Considering the nature of his work, he was rightly recommended for the pay scale of Mechanic/Hand Pump Technician. However, while his juniors are being extended the said pay scale, he has been deprived of the same. The action of the respondents, therefore, is violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India. It is discriminatory and liable to be set aside. In support of his submissions, learned counsel for the petitioner placed reliance upon the judgments of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Randhir Singh v. Union of India, (1982) 1 SCC 618; Jivan Lal v. Pravin Krishna, Principal Secretary and Others, (2016) 15 SCC 747; and Prem Ram v. Managing Director, Uttarakhand Pey Jal and Nirman Nigam, (2015) 11 SCC 255. 6. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents/State opposed the submissions advanced on behalf of the petitioner. He submitted that the petitioner never discharged duties as a Mechanic/Hand Pump Technician, and a mere recommendation cannot confer any enforceable right upon the petitioner to claim the pay scale of Mechanic/Hand Pump Technician, particularly when such recommendation was erroneously made. He further submitted that the stand taken by the respondents/State in the return is just and proper, and prayed for dismissal of the writ petition. 7. A patient hearing was given to the learned counsel for the parties. The records of the case has been examined with rapt attention. 8. Issue involved in this petition is whether the petitioner was performing the job of Mechanic/hand pump technician when he was promoted as Plumber, and whether his juniors were given the pay scale of Mechanic/hand pump 4 technician but the petitioner was deprived in spite of having made several representations? 9. This Court has gone through the entire documentation so as to come to the crux of the matter whether infact the juniors to the petitioner have been granted the pay scale which the petitioner could not get and in that exercise it has been found that though the petitioner was formally appointed and regularized as Plumber, his actual duties, as borne out from the records of the department, were that of a Mechanic/Hand Pump Technician. The official communications, including the letters dated 22.09.2017, 11.04.2012, 30.12.2008, 27.10.2007, 02.04.2007, 08.03.2006 and several others, all issued by departmental authorities, consistently describe and deploy the petitioner as a Mechanic/Hand Pump Technician. Further, the recommendations made by respondent No.3 and the Superintendent Engineer in 2002 and 2005 also clearly state that the petitioner was satisfactorily performing the duties of Mechanic/Hand Pump Technician and recommend grant of the corresponding pay scale. 10. The respondents’ plea that the petitioner never worked as a Mechanic/Hand Pump Technician and that the recommendations were wrongly made stands belied by their own documents. The State has failed to reconcile why, despite repeatedly assigning the petitioner the duties of a Mechanic/Hand Pump Technician, it continued to deny him the pay scale of that post while some of his juniors were extended the benefit. Such action is arbitrary and discriminatory and runs contrary to Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution. The principle of “equal pay for equal work,” as laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Randhir Singh (Supra) and reaffirmed in subsequent decisions, also applies. 5 11. It is also placed on record that the petitioner retired from service on 31.03.2018 during the pendency of this petition. Consequently, the issue is not confined only to the period of his service but it will also extend to the calculation of pensionary benefits after retirement, which are required to be recalculated on the basis of the pay scale of Mechanic/Hand Pump Technician. 12. In view of the above analysis, it is held that the petitioner is entitled to the pay scale of Mechanic/Hand Pump Technician (Rs. 3500–5200) w.e.f. 06.06.1995, the date from which he was takin in work charge establishment as Plumber and, in fact, discharged the higher duties. The respondents are directed to re- fix the pay of the petitioner in the aforesaid scale, to compute and pay him all arrears of salary from 06.06.1995 till his retirement on 31.03.2018. Thereafter, the respondents/State shall also be duty bound to revise the consequential pensionary and retiral benefits flowing therefrom and then make the payment accordingly. The arrears so calculated shall be paid to the petitioner within a period of 60 days from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. 13. The writ petition is accordingly allowed. No order as to costs. Sd/- (Sachin Singh Rajput) Judge H.Ansari HIFZURRAHMAN ANSARI Digitally signed by HIFZURRAHMAN ANSARI Date: 2025.09.26 16:31:28 +0530