HC raps state for inaction in pay revision case, imposes Rs 5L costs

Tribune News Service

Saurabh Malik

Chandigarh, March 17

Deprecating “highly” the state of Haryana’s inaction and making a Kurukshetra University employee wait for pay revision for more than 16 years, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has imposed Rs 5 lakh costs. Justice Raj Mohan Singh of the HC also made it clear that the amount was to be paid by the respondent (state) to the petitioner for “harassment meted out to him for this long period of more than 16 years”.

Sets three-month deadline

• The state was also directed to take all corrective measures/steps to provide "corresponding" revised pay scale to the petitioner from January 1, 2006, for the purpose of re-fixation of pension
• For the purpose, Justice Raj Mohan Singh set a three-month deadline, while making it clear that the petitioner would also be entitled to 6% per annum interest on the arrears of revised pension from the accrual date till its final realisation of the same

The state was also directed to take all corrective measures/steps to provide “corresponding” revised pay scale to the petitioner from January 1, 2006, for the purpose of re-fixation of pension. For the purpose, Justice Raj Mohan Singh set a three-month deadline, while making it clear that the petitioner would also be entitled to six per cent per annum interest on the arrears of revised pension from the accrual date till its final realization of the same.

Petitioner Sat Parkash Arora had moved the HC for issuance of directions to Kurukshetra University and other respondents to revise his pension and pensionary benefits in accordance with the last pay drawn as the Deputy Registrar at the time of his retirement. Directions were further sought to revise his pension as per memorandum dated February 6, 2015.

Justice Raj Mohan Singh’s Bench, during the course of hearing, was told that the petitioner’s pension had not been revised from January 1, 2006, by the respondent. Consequently, the university could not implement the same.

Referring to the technical aspect of the matter, Justice Raj Mohan Singh asserted the reason for not revising the petitioner’s pension appeared to be “that there was no corresponding revised pay scale provided to the corresponding pre-revised pay scale of 12,000-18,300. The discrepancy is on account of inaction on the part of the respondent by not providing scale of 12,000-18,300 in the pay scale, which is to be revised from January 1, 2006”.

Before parting with the case, the Justice Raj Mohan Singh asserted the matter had virtually gone uncontested on behalf of the respondent-state. “The respondent-university is to implement the ultimate order/instructions of the respondent-state while implementing the revised pay scale of the petitioner for the purpose of granting him the required pension. The writ petition is allowed with costs of Rs 5 lakh…”

#kurukshetra #kurukshetra university