Judgment 1. The appellant-Monghyr Khestriya Gramin Bank (hereinafter referred to as the Bank) had filed the present appeal against the order dated 3.3.2000, passed by a learned Single Judge in C.W.J.C. No. 1461 of 1999, whereby he has directed the appellant to fix the pay scale of the writ petitioner-respondents strictly as per the guidelines of the Central Government issued vide letter dated 22.2.1991 (Annexure 1 to the writ application) if already not fixed in such manner and while fixing the pay scale, the procedure prescribed in paragraph 4(v) of the said letter must be strictly followed forthwith. 2. Writ petitioner-respondent no. 1 is an Association of the employees of the Bank and respondents no. 2 to 4 are Clerk-cum-cashiers posted in different Branches of the Bank. The appellant-Bank was established under the provisions of the Regional Rural Bank Act, 1976. It is sponsored by the United Commercial Bank. The employees of the Regional Rural Banks, who were paid salary at a scale par with the employees of the State Government and the Co-operative Societies, made a demand for parity of their pay scale with that of the employees of the Commercial Bank. They filed writ applications making the said prayer being C.W.J.C. Nos. 7149-50 of 1982 and 132 of 1984 before the Supreme Court. It referred the matter to the National Industrial Tribunal (for short the Tribunal) to decide the controversy. The Tribunal gave an Award on 30.4.1990. Thereafter, the Government of India constituted an Equation Committee for working out the fitment of the pay scale of the employees of the Regional Rural Banks and the Equation Committee submitted its report on 16.1.1991. The Central Government has authority to determine the salary structure of the employees of the Regional Rural Banks. The Government of India accepted the Award of the Tribunal and the report of the Equation Committee vide letter dated 22.2.1991 and it was circulated to the Chairman and Managing Director of all the sponsor Banks and the Chairman of the Regional Rural Banks. 3. According to the said letter of the Government of India, the fitment in the new scale of pay was to be made effective from 1.9.1987. Paragraph 4 of the said letter contained a procedure for deciding the question of fitment in the new scale. 3. According to the said letter of the Government of India, the fitment in the new scale of pay was to be made effective from 1.9.1987. Paragraph 4 of the said letter contained a procedure for deciding the question of fitment in the new scale. Paragraph 7 of the said letter provided that the employees/ officers recruited after the appointed date would be effected in the first stage in the sponsor Banks pay scales from the date of their appointments and they would draw their annual increments on the anniversary of their appointment in the respective cadre subject to usual service conditions. Paragraph 8 of the said letter provided that in respect of the employees/officers appointed after 1.9.1987, the basic fitment as on 1.9.1987 would be in accordance with the instructions given above. Thereafter, the fitment in the higher post would be effected in accordance with the practice prevailing in sponsor Bank in the light of direction contained in Annexure 1. The appellant-Bank issued a circular on 10.11.1992 giving pay protection to those clerks, who joined the Bank on 1.6.1990 and whose total emoluments were lower than the total emoluments which they were drawing immediately prior to implementation of the Award in the new scale of pay. A copy of the same has been annexed as Annexure 3 to the writ application. 4. While considering the terms of the Award, report of the Equation Committee and direction of the Central Government, as mentioned above, certain operational problems arose and, accordingly, the National Bank for Agricultural and Rural Development (hereinafter referred to as the NABARD) constituted a Working Group on the basis of discussion with the Government of India. The said report was accepted by the Government of India with certain modifications and the same was issued by the NABARD vide circular dated 20.3.1993 as per the instruction of the Government of India, a copy of which has been annexed as Annexure B to the counter-affidavit filed on behalf of the appellant- Bank in the writ application. 5. The said report was accepted by the Government of India with certain modifications and the same was issued by the NABARD vide circular dated 20.3.1993 as per the instruction of the Government of India, a copy of which has been annexed as Annexure B to the counter-affidavit filed on behalf of the appellant- Bank in the writ application. 5. The grievance of the writ petitioner-respondent is that the Bank is not implementing the terms and conditions of the Award as well as the report of the Equation Committee as accepted by the Government of India, on the other hand, it has fixed their pay fitment in such a way that they are getting lesser pay scale than what they were getting before fixation of their pay. The Bank by circular dated 10.11.1992 considered the question of pay protection of petitioner-respondents no. 2 to 4 and other employees, who joined the Bank on 1.6.1990 and protected their pay by giving a personal allowance in the corresponding scale of the.pay of the sponsor Bank. The said direction is in violation of the Award as well as the report of the Equation Committee as accepted by the Government of India. The basic fitment of employees and officers recruited after 1.9.1987 does not mean that the basic salary given to an employee of sponsor Bank shall be given to the employees of the Regional Rural Bank even if they were drawing higher salary. In fact, there is a difference between the basic salary and the basic fitment of salary. The basic fitment of salary in terms of the Award of the Tribunal, report of the Equation Committee and the report of the Working Group means that the salary of the employees of the Regional Rural Banks which they were drawing earlier, shall have to be protected and fitted in the light of the recommendation of the Equation Committee. The Equation Committee has laid down principles that the Pay + D.A. shall be the principle for adjusting the pay scale of the employees/officers of the Regional Rural Banks as the employees/officers of the Regional Rural Banks were drawing higher scale than the officers/employees of the sponsor Bank on 1.9.1987 and hence the said formula has been evolved to ward off the evil effect like reduction in pay scale of the employees/officers of the Regional Rural Banks. No where, it has been provided that in case the employees of the Regional Rural Banks are drawing higher salary than that of the sponsor Bank then their salary has to be reduced unless according to the terms of the aforesaid Award, report of the Equation Committee and the letter of the Central Government, which relate to fixation of the pay scale of the employees, show that for the purpose of fixation of initial pay-scale of employees of the Regionai Rural Banks, the decision has been taken that the annual increments admissible to the employees of the sponsor Bank shall be added to the initial pay scale of the sponsor Bank so as to bring it at par or slightly higher than the pay which the employees of the Regional Rural Banks were drawing since their appointment after 1.9.1987. In other words, no where it has been provided in the Award that the pay of the employees of the Regional Rural Banks appointed after 1.9.1987 is to be fixed treating the basic pay of the sponsor Bank as initial pay. 6. In brief, the grievance of the writ petitioner-respondents is with regard to fitment of pay scale of the employees appointed after 1.9.1987 or to put it specifically appointed on 1.6.1990. 7. The stand of the appellant, on the other hand, is that the fitment of pay of the employees has been made in accordance with the terms of the Award, report of the Equation Committee, the letter of the Central Government and the subsequent letter of the NABARD, which was issued as per instruction of the Central Government. Writ petitioner-respondents 2 to 4 are clerk-cum-cashiers, who joined the service of the Bank on 1.6.1990 i.e. after 1.9.1987. Appointed date, according to the Award of the Tribunal, is 1.9.1987 and in terms of the Government of Indias tetter dated 22.2.1991, the Bank fitted the pay scale of petitioner-respondents no. Writ petitioner-respondents 2 to 4 are clerk-cum-cashiers, who joined the service of the Bank on 1.6.1990 i.e. after 1.9.1987. Appointed date, according to the Award of the Tribunal, is 1.9.1987 and in terms of the Government of Indias tetter dated 22.2.1991, the Bank fitted the pay scale of petitioner-respondents no. 2 to 4 and similarly situated persons in the sponsor Banks pay scales from the date of their appointment and they were also allowed to draw their annual increment on the anniversary of their appointment and in terms of paragraph 4(iv) of the said Government letter dated 22.2.1991 two additional increments were added in their pay scale in respect of those who were Graduates and had also earned increments in the pay scale of the State Government which they were drawing prior to the implementation of the Award of the Tribunal. In case, the fitment resulted in less pay than what they were drawing in the pay scale of the State Government i.e. prior to the implementation of the Award of the Tribunal, their total emoluments were protected in the line of paragraph 4(v) of the Government of Indias letter dated 22.2.1991 and a fitment charge has been finalised showing that in no case they are getting lesser scale than what they were getting earlier. In making fitment of pay, if any grade of employee was getting less pay than what he was getting from before, then personal allowance in terms of the directions was allowed to such employee. In regard to the case of writ petitioner-respondents no. 3 and 4, it has been stated that they have been allowed two increments in their initial pay scale as Graduation increments, making their basic pay to Rs. 1000/-, The short fall of their pay after fitment in comparison to Regional Rural Bank pay scale as 22.2.1991 was adjusted by grant of personal allowance of Rs. 158.90, making the total emoluments equal to the salary they were drawing as on 22.2.1991 (the date on which the Central Government issued the letter as contained in Annexure 1). 1000/-, The short fall of their pay after fitment in comparison to Regional Rural Bank pay scale as 22.2.1991 was adjusted by grant of personal allowance of Rs. 158.90, making the total emoluments equal to the salary they were drawing as on 22.2.1991 (the date on which the Central Government issued the letter as contained in Annexure 1). Additional two Graduation increments were allowed totally in compliance of paragraph 4 (iv) of the said letter, which provides that for the purpose of fitment, the basic pay will be arrived at after excluding the number of increments, which an employee/officer might have received for family planning, graduation, CAIIB and any other account other than the normal annual increments. After according the corresponding fitment in the sponsor Banks pay scale to the employee/officer, the increments should be added as applicable to the employees/officers of the sponsor Banks for graduation, CAIIB etc. Respondent no. 2, who is a non-Graduate, has also been given the fitment in such a manner that his salary has not been less than what he was getting on the relevant date i.e. 22.2.1991. He has been given personal allowance to make his salary at par with what he was getting on that date. 8. Further case of the appellant is that in terms of the Award, the report of the Equation Committee and the letter of the Central Government, it has issued a circular dated 10.11.1992 (Annexure 3 to the writ application) allowing personal allowance to compensate the difference in the pay scales of the employees including the writ petitioner-respondents no. 2 to 4, but that was never challenged by them. 9. From the pleadings of the parties, the controversy in this appeal is with regard to payment of pay of the clerk-cum-cashiers, who have joined the Bank on 1.6.1990. That is evident from paragraph 17 of the writ application filed by the respondents. There is no dispute between the parties that the fitment in the new scales is to be made in terms of the Award, the report of the Equation Committee, the letter of the Government of India dated 22.2.1991 and the clarification issued by the NABARD on 20.3.1993. The only controversy is as to whether the same has been followed in the fitment of the new scales in the case of the employees of the Bank appointed on 1.6.1990. 10. The only controversy is as to whether the same has been followed in the fitment of the new scales in the case of the employees of the Bank appointed on 1.6.1990. 10. Paragraph 4 of the fetter dated 22.2.1991 contains a provision with regard to fitment into new scales of pay as on 1.9.1987 and paragraph no. 7 provides that the employees, who have been recruited after appointed date, will be fitted in the first stage in the sponsor Banks pay scales from the date of their appointment and they should draw their annual increments on the anniversary of their appointment in their respective cadre subject to usual service condition. As stated above, paragraph 4 of the said fetter deals with the fitment in the new scales of pay as on 1.9.1987. In sub-paragraph (5) thereof, it was provided that while the fitment in the manner as indicated in other sub-paragraphs, should not normally resort in reduction in total emoluments drawn earlier by any employee/officer at any level, but where after fitment in the new scale the total amount is lower than the total emoluments which he was drawing prior to the appointed date in the Bank i.e. 1.9.1987, the concerned employee shall be paid personal allowance to the extent of difference which should be adjusted to the extent of half of the increase in Basic Pay or D.A., or both, accrued to the concerned employee after 1.9.1987. An example of working out the personal allowance is also indicated in the said paragraph. In regard to an employee appointed after 1.9.1987, there was a provision to meet a situation where the emoluments become lesser than what they were getting prior to the implementation of the new pay scales. 11. The matter was considered by the NABARD and it issued a circular dated 20.3.1993 with the instruction of the Government of India regarding the employees recruited after 1.9.1987. It provided that the pay scale of the employees recruited after the aforesaid date has to be fitted in the first stage of the sponsor Banks pay scale as provided in paragraph 7 of the letter of the Government of India dated 22.2.1991. It provided that the pay scale of the employees recruited after the aforesaid date has to be fitted in the first stage of the sponsor Banks pay scale as provided in paragraph 7 of the letter of the Government of India dated 22.2.1991. In case their monthly emoluments drawn in Regional Rural Banks pay scale is less than gross monthly emoluments in sponsor Bank as on 22.2.1991 that should be protected by grant of personal allowance and that should be adjusted in the manner as mentioned in paragraph 4(v) of the letter dated 22.2.1991, The said letter has been annexed as Annexure B to the counter-affidavit filed on behalf of the appellant-Bank in the writ application as stated above and the heading dealing with the Fitment in respect of employee/officers recruited after 1 September 1987, at item no. 5, runs as follows: "Fitment in respect of employee/ officers recruited after 1 September 1987. As per GOI circular dated 22.2.1991. the employees/officers recruited after 1.9.1987 are to be fitted in the first stage of the sponsor bank pay scales on the date of their appointment and they would draw their annual increments on the anniversary of their appointment in the respective cadres, it was, however, observed that consequent upon such fitment, the gross monthly emoluments actually drawn by some RRB employees in the RRB pay scales fell short of the gross monthly emoluments being drawn in the sponsor bank pay scales.. The basic fitment of employees/officers recruited after the appointed date should be as per GOI order dated 22.2.1991. However, as the GOI have conveyed the acceptance of the NIT Award read with Equation Committee Report on 22.2.1991, the total emoluments drawn by the RRB employees upto the aforesaid date i.e. 22.2.1991 should be protected by grant of personal allowance, wherever necessary. The personal allowance so granted should be adjusted in the manner indicated at Para 4(V) of GOl circular dated 22.2.1991." 12. The appellant-Bank even prior to the aforesaid clarification by the NABARD as stated above, has issued a circular in 1992 giving pay protection to the writ petitioner-respondents no. 2 to 4 and other employees by giving personal allowance in the same manner as subsequently given by the NABARD with respect to the aforesaid categories of the employees. 13. The appellant-Bank even prior to the aforesaid clarification by the NABARD as stated above, has issued a circular in 1992 giving pay protection to the writ petitioner-respondents no. 2 to 4 and other employees by giving personal allowance in the same manner as subsequently given by the NABARD with respect to the aforesaid categories of the employees. 13. Thus, the fitment scale of the employees after recruitment date i.e. 1.9.1987 has been fixed in terms of paragraph 7 of the circular of the Government of India and when the fitment resulted in reduction of pay drawn earlier on the relevant date i.e. 22.2.1991, the appellant protected their pay by taking recourse to paragraphs 4 and 5 of the Government of Indias letter dated 22.2.1991 by allowing them personal allowance to compensate them by issuing a circular dated 10.11.1992. Subsequently, as stated above, the NABARD also clarified the matter and said that the provision of paragraph 4(v) of the Government of Indias letter dated 22.2.1991, which applies in the case of fitment of scale as on 1.9.1987, is also applicable in the case of the employees recruited after 1.9.1987. The writ petitioner- respondents did not challenge the circular of the Bank dated 10.11.1992 and as such after such a long time they cannot be allowed to challenge the same, specially when the circular is neither arbitrary nor contrary to the terms of the Award, report of the Equation Committee and the letter of the Government of India and that of the NABARD as stated above. 14. Thus, as the pay scale of the writ-petitioner-respondents no. 2 to 4 has been fixed in terms of the Government letter dated 22.2.1991, the direction given by the learned Single Judge to consider the same by taking into consideration paragraph 4(v) of the said letter is not sustainable in the eye of law. 15. in the result, this appeal is allowed and the impugned order passed by the learned Single Judge is set aside. P.N.Yadav 16 I agree.