H.L. Sharma vs Haryana Power Generation … on 28 July, 2009

      IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
                     CHANDIGARH.

                                                   C.W.P. No. 11135 of 2009
                                          DATE OF DECISION : 28.07.2009

H.L. Sharma

                                                             .... PETITIONER

                                    Versus

Haryana Power Generation Corporation Ltd. and others

                                                         ..... RESPONDENTS


CORAM :- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SATISH KUMAR MITTAL


Present:     Mr. Maharaj Kumar, Advocate,
             for the petitioner.

                          ***

SATISH KUMAR MITTAL , J. ( Oral )

The petitioner is working as Master Foreman in the office of

Executive Engineer/Electrical Maintenance Division – II, Stage – II,

Haryana Power Generation Corporation Limited, Panipat Thermal Power

Station – I, Panipat. He has filed the instant petition for issuing direction to

the respondents to re-fix his pay, giving him the benefit of four special

increments in terms of the decision taken on 9.12.1987 by the Standing

Committee of Panipat Thermal Power Station.

It is the case of the petitioner that when his services were

regularised on the post of Foreman, he was given the benefit of four special

increments on account of his work-charge service. Subsequently, contrary to

the above decision of the Standing Committee, the respondents have
CWP No. 11135 of 2009 -2-

illegally reduced the pay scale of the petitioner from Rs. 1020/- to Rs. 850/-,

by excluding the aforesaid benefit of four special increments. Thereafter, the

petitioner made representation and in the year 2005, the Chief Engineer

O/M – I, Panipat Thermal Power Station, Panipat, vide its memo dated

29.6.2005, asked the Senior Accounts Officer to re-fix the pay of the

petitioner, while allowing him the benefit of four special increments in

terms of the decision dated 9.12.1987 of the Standing Committee.

It is the case of the petitioner that his service book has been

sent on three occasions to the office of Senior Accounts Officer/Pay

Fixation, Panchkula, for re-fixation of his pay in accordance with the said

decision, but the respondents have not taken any final decision on the same.

The petitioner has also met the Financial Adviser/Head Quarter, Haryana

Power General Corporation Ltd., Panchkula (respondent No.3 herein), but

he is not taking any final decision. The representation dated 10.11.2008

(Annexure P-6) made by the petitioner to the Managing Director, Haryana

Power General Corporation Ltd., is still pending. In view of these facts,

counsel for the petitioner states that the petitioner will be satisfied if

respondent No.3 is directed to consider and decide the issue of re-fixation of

the pay of the petitioner in terms of the decision dated 9.12.1987 taken by

the Standing Committee of Panipat Thermal Power Station.

In view of the above, without issuing notice of motion as it will

un-necessary delay the matter, this petition is disposed of with a direction to

respondent No.3 to consider the claim of the petitioner with regard to re-
CWP No. 11135 of 2009 -3-

fixation of his pay in terms of the decision dated 9.12.1987 taken by the

Standing Committee of Panipat Thermal Power Station, within a period of

three months, by passing a speaking order.

July 28, 2009                                ( SATISH KUMAR MITTAL )
ndj                                                   JUDGE