Entitlement to Regular Pay Scale Arising from Adoption of Post in Budget Estimates to Ensure Parity.

The petitioner was appointed as a Tax Collector on a consolidated salary basis in the Notified Area Committee, Bishnah, on 25.03.1992.

While the petitioner continued his service, his salary was regularized in the graded pay scale of Rs. 950-1500 only on 30.06.1998.

The petitioner sought retrospective regularization from his initial date of appointment, citing the cases of two similarly situated employees, Sanjay Kumar and Shashi Kumar (Khilafwarzi Inspectors).

These employees were also appointed on a consolidated basis in 1992 but were granted regular pay scales shortly thereafter in October 1992.

The respondents contested the petition on the grounds of estoppel, arguing the petitioner accepted the 1998 regularization order without initial challenge.

Whether the petitioner is entitled to the regular pay scale retrospectively from the date the post was adopted in the Budget Estimates, based on the principle of parity with similarly situated employees?

The court applied the constitutional principle of Equality and Non-discrimination under Article 14 of the Constitution of India.

It relied on the doctrine of Parity in public employment, which mandates that employees in similar circumstances and under the same engagement conditions must be treated equally regarding service benefits.

The court also examined the administrative terms of the initial engagement orders, which linked the release of graded scales to the "sanction of creation" and "adoption of posts in Budget Estimates."

The Court perused the service records of the comparison employees, Sanjay Kumar and Shashi Kumar, noting they were engaged on the same consolidated terms as the petitioner in early 1992.

While the Director of Local Bodies had agreed to adopt the petitioner’s post in 1992, and the Administrator formally adopted the post in the pay scale of Rs. 800-1500 on 13.10.1992, the petitioner was denied the graded scale until 1998.

Conversely, the other two employees received their graded scales on 23.10.1992, immediately following the budget adoption.

The Court reasoned that since the petitioner’s post was also adopted on 13.10.1992, there was no justifiable reason to delay his benefits for six years.

The Court found this to be a case of "invidious discrimination," as the petitioner was entitled to parity based on the identical conditions of his engagement.

It held that the petitioner was entitled to the graded scale of pay effective from the date his post was adopted in the budget.

The Court directed the respondents to release the grade of Rs. 800-1500 (old) in favor of the petitioner effective from 13.10.1992 and to pay all resulting arrears of salary within two months.