STATE TIMES NEWS
JAMMU: Justice M.K Hanjura of J&K High Court Jammu Wing on Monday directed State to accord petitioners who are holding civil posts on the executive side, the same treatment as has been bestowed on the petitioners in SWP No.529/1992, who were members of the judicial service, in the matter of the grant of the pay scales. “This exercise shall be concluded by the respondents within a period of six weeks from the date the copy of this order is served on them and the compliance report shall be submitted on or before the next date of listing before the Bench”, the court observed.
The court directions came in contempt petition filed seeking implementation of judgment given by this Court in SWP No.529/92 on April 7, 1996. In the aforementioned case petitioners who were members of the judicial service sought benefit of SRO 75 of 1992. This was allowed. In the present case same benefit is being sought by the petitioners who are holding civil posts on the executive side. Precise argument which was sought to be raised by the State was taken note of in the aforementioned writ petition. Same was negative.
Senior Advocate DC Raina with Advocate Rajneesh Oswal appeared for the applicants.
While giving directions, Justice Hanjura observed that the case started on its odyssey in the year 1992 and winded its tortuous course by now for almost 25 years. In this journey, some of the interveners have entered in the eighth or ninth decades of their life tottering, or, rather doddering their way to register their claim in the Court and the pith and core of the judgment of the Division Bench, supra is that the case of the interveners cannot be treated as a sui generis case. They have to be equated together and treated on par with the other similarly situated Superintending Engineers in the matter of the application of the SRO 75 of 1992 dated March 30, 1992 regulating the salary of this class of officers. They constitute a unique and a peculiar class of their own. The SRO detailed above will apply to the entire cadre of Superintending Engineers that includes the interveners as well who are similarly circumstanced with this class of officers and to whom alone the benefit of the SRO stated above has been accorded. The judgment of the Division Bench is lucid and clear. It states in unambiguous terms that failure on the part of the appellants (interveners) to get impleaded as co-petitioners/party respondents in SWP No.1608/1992 would be of no consequence. It proceeds to state that once the pay scales are revised, the benefit is to flow to all the members of the cadre and it cannot be restricted to a few that are the petitioners before the Court.
In the end, the Division Bench has concluded that the applicants are permitted to intervene in the Contempt (SWP) No.123/2013, meaning thereby that their grievance has to be redressed and that too in this contempt petition only.
Aniston and Theroux met ‘one last time’ on Valentine’s Day
PIL in HC claims Padmaavat glorifies Sati
Veteran actor Aparajita Mohanty joins BJP
Ladakhi film makers warn against piracy
Smoking damages heart, blood vessels: Dr Sushil
© 2017 State Times Daily Newspaper