JUDGMENT : Instant Letters Patent Appeal filed under Section 10 of the Delhi High Court Original Side Rules, as applicable to the State of Himachal Pradesh, lays challenge to order dated 27.8.2021 passed by learned Single Judge of this Court in CWPOA No. 3782 of 2019, titled HPSEB Supervisory Accounts Services Association v. H.P. State Electricity Board, whereby learned Single Judge, while quashing and setting aside communication dated 3.7.2001 issued by the Secretary, Himachal Pradesh State Electricity Board (hereinafter, ‘Board’) to its Chief Accounts Officer, directed the appellant-Board to grant benefit of Time Bound Promotional Scale (hereinafter, ‘TBPS’) on completion of 9/16 years of regular service, to those members of the petitioner-Association, who were eligible and were left out as a consequence of issuance of communication dated 3.7.2001, from the date of their eligibility alongwith arrears and interest at the rate of 7% per annum. 2. For having bird’s eye view of the matter, certain undisputed facts, which may be relevant for the adjudication of the case at hand are that vide office order No. 80 dated 14.11.1990, the appellant-Board revised the scales of pay of certain categories of its employees with effect from 1.1.1986. The SAS Superintendents (NG) were placed in the pay scale of Rs. 2000-3500 with initial start of Rs. 2100/-. On 30.1.1991, the appellant-Board introduced a Scheme providing for the benefit of TBPS to its employees after completion of 9/16 years of regular service in the Board, having a maximum scale upto Rs. 3500/-. On 20.5.1992, the SAS Superintendents (NG) were also declared eligible for the benefit of TBPS, as a consequence of which, aforesaid category of employees also became entitled to pay scale of Rs. 2400-4250 after nine years of service and Rs. 3000-4500 after sixteen years of service. However, aforesaid benefit of TBPS was to be made available to those employees, who did not get promoted to the next higher post on completion of requisite period of 9 or 16 years, as the case may be. 3. Vide communication dated 5.1.1995, the appellant-Board revised the pay scales of SAS Superintendents (NG) to Rs. 2100-3700 with effect from 1.1.1986. On 12.5.1995, benefit of TBPS granted to SAS Superintendents (NG) was ordered to be withdrawn by the appellant-Board with immediate effect. The posts of SAS Superintendents (NG) in the appellant-Board were re-designated as Assistant Accounts Officers in the pay scale of Rs. 2100-3700 with effect from 1.1.1986. On 12.5.1995, benefit of TBPS granted to SAS Superintendents (NG) was ordered to be withdrawn by the appellant-Board with immediate effect. The posts of SAS Superintendents (NG) in the appellant-Board were re-designated as Assistant Accounts Officers in the pay scale of Rs. 2200-4000 plus Rs.200/- as special pay, vide order dated 6.6.1996. On 4.12.1996, the appellant-Board sought options from the SAS Superintendents (NG) to the effect that those who wanted to opt for the initial pay scale of Rs. 2000-3500 with initial start of Rs. 2100/- would be entitled for the benefit of TBPS and those, who opted for improved pay scale of Rs. 2100-3700/- would not be so entitled. Pursuant to issuance of aforesaid order, two different categories of SAS Superintendents (NG) came to be formed, one which opted for initial pay scale of Rs. 2000-3500 with initial start of Rs. 2100/- and second, who opted for improved pay scale of Rs. 2100-3700/-. 4. On 3.7.2001, Secretary of the appellant-Board circulated a clarification to its Chief Accounts Officer to the effect that only those SAS Superintendents (NG), who have completed 9/16 years of service on the induction post of SAS Superintendents (NG) prior to their re-designation as Assistant Accounts Officers, i.e. 6.6.1996, are entitled for the benefit of TBPS on Punjab State Electricity Board (hereinafter, ‘PSEB’) pattern, as the posts of Assistant Accounts Officers do not exist in the PSEB. 5. As a natural corollary to the aforesaid communication dated 3.7.2001, further classification came to be drawn by the appellant-Board between SAS Superintendents (NG) having opted for the scale of Rs. 2000-3500, first, those who had become eligible for TBPS before re-designation as Assistant Accounts Officers and the second, those who became eligible for TBPS after re-designation as Assistant Accounts Officers. 6. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the aforesaid communication, the petitioner-Association made a detailed representation to the Member (Finance and Accounts) of the appellant-Board. The meeting between the Board and the representatives of the petitioner-Association was held on 26.7.2002, wherein it was decided to examine the demand afresh and thereafter to submit the case in detail to the Whole Time Members of the Board for their consideration and decision after obtaining views of the Member (F&A). The meeting between the Board and the representatives of the petitioner-Association was held on 26.7.2002, wherein it was decided to examine the demand afresh and thereafter to submit the case in detail to the Whole Time Members of the Board for their consideration and decision after obtaining views of the Member (F&A). Since no action, whatsoever, came to be taken by the appellant-Board on the aforesaid representation of the petitioner-Association, in terms of the decision taken in the meeting held inter se representatives of the petitioner-Association on 26.7.2002, it approached erstwhile Himachal Pradesh Administrative Tribunal by way of an Original Application, which subsequently, on abolishment of the Tribunal, came to be transferred to this Court and was re-registered as CWPOA No. 3782 of 2019, praying therein for the following reliefs : “(i) That the impugned Annexure A-14, dated 3.7.2001 may be quashed and set aside. (ii) That the respondent Board may be directed to grant the members of the applicant Association, the Time Bound Promotional Scales on completion of 9/16 years of service from the date of their joining the induction post of SAS Superintendents (NG) with all consequential benefits and to pay arrears along with interest @ 18% per annum.” 7. Appellant-Board though contested the claim of the petitioner-Association on the ground that it, in principle, follows PSEB pattern in the matter of pay scales and other career progression schemes like TBPS etc. to its employees but it deviated from the pattern adopted by the PSEB, while granting improved pay scale of Rs. 2100-3700/- to SAS Superintendents (NG) and also while re-designating them as Assistant Accounts Officers. Appellant-Board also claimed that the PSEB did not maintain the category of Assistant Accounts Officers, hence, the employees with such designation in the Board could not be granted the benefit of TBPS. 8. 2100-3700/- to SAS Superintendents (NG) and also while re-designating them as Assistant Accounts Officers. Appellant-Board also claimed that the PSEB did not maintain the category of Assistant Accounts Officers, hence, the employees with such designation in the Board could not be granted the benefit of TBPS. 8. Learned Single Judge, on the basis of pleadings of the respective parties, allowed the petition having been filed by the petitioner-Association and quashed and set aside communication dated 3.7.2001 issued by the appellant-Board to its Chief Accounts Officer, whereby it was clarified that only those SAS Superintendents (NG), who have completed 9/16 years of regular service on the induction post of SAS Superintendents (NG), prior to their re-designation as Assistant Accounts Officer i.e. 6.6.1996, are entitled for the benefit of TBPS on PSEB pattern and directed the appellant-Board to grant the benefit of TBPS to those members of the petitioner-Association after completion of 9/16 years of service, who are eligible and were left out as a consequence of communication dated 3.7.2001. In the aforesaid background, appellant-Board has approached this court in the instant appeal, praying therein to set aside the judgment passed by learned Single Judge. 9. Having heard learned Counsel appearing for the appellant-Board and perused the grounds taken in the appeal vis-à-vis the reasoning assigned by learned Single Judge, while allowing the petition filed by the petitioner-Association, this Court finds no illegality or infirmity in the same, as such, no interference is called for. Precise grouse of the appellant-Board, as has been raised in the instant appeal and as further canvassed by Mr. Tara Singh Chauhan, Learned Counsel appearing for the appellant-Board, is that since it, while having deviated from PSEB pattern, proceeded to grant improved pay scale of Rs. 2100-3700/- to the SAS Superintendents (NG), such employees have rightly not been held entitled for the benefit of TBPS. Besides above, it is also claimed by the appellant-board that PSEB does not maintain the category of Assistant Accounts Officer, hence, employees with such designation in the appellant-Board cannot be granted benefit of TBPS. 10. It is not in dispute that the appellant-Board, in principle, follows PSEB pattern in the matter of pay scales and other career progression schemes like TBPS to its employees. 10. It is not in dispute that the appellant-Board, in principle, follows PSEB pattern in the matter of pay scales and other career progression schemes like TBPS to its employees. It is also not in dispute that the appellant-Board, of its own, on 30.1.1991, introduced the scheme providing for benefit of TBPS to those employees, who have completed 9/16 years of regular service in the Board, having maximum scale of Rs.3500/-, as a consequence of which, SAS Superintendents (NG) also came to be declared eligible for the benefit of TBPS. Appellant-Board, of its own, vide communication dated 5.1.1995, revised the pay scale of the SAS Superintendents (NG) to Rs. 2100-3700/- with effect from 1.1.1986, as a consequence of which, on 12.5.1995, benefit of TBPS granted to SAS Superintendents (NG), was ordered to be withdrawn by the appellant-Board, without there being any plausible reason. The appellant Board, of its own, re-designated SAS Superintendents (NG) as Assistant Accounts Officers in the pay scale of Rs. 2200-4000/- with special pay of Rs. 200/-, vide order dated 6.6.1996 and thereafter, sought options from the said category to the effect that those, who wanted initial pay scale of Rs. 2000-3500 with initial start of Rs. 2100/-, would be entitled to TBPS and those, who wanted improved pay scale of Rs. 2100-3700/-, would not be so entitled, as a consequence of which, two different classes of SAS Superintendents (NG) came to be formed. Once, options were sought from the employees, after re-designation of the post, it is not understood, how the appellant-Board could subsequently turn-around and claim that the benefit of TBPS would be restricted to a specific class of SAS Superintendents (NG) that too, on the ground that the PSEB did not have category of Assistant Accounts Officers. 11. Though, in the case at hand, appellant-Board claimed that PSEB did not have the category of Assistant Accounts Officers, but, such claim of the appellant-Board is totally contrary to the records. Petitioner-Association specifically claimed in its pleadings and its representation made to the Member (F & A) of the Board, that the PSEB had the posts of Assistant Accounts Officers since 1997 as per PSEB order No. 8025, dated 24.4.1997. Petitioner-Association specifically claimed in its pleadings and its representation made to the Member (F & A) of the Board, that the PSEB had the posts of Assistant Accounts Officers since 1997 as per PSEB order No. 8025, dated 24.4.1997. Aforesaid plea of the petitioner-Association never came to be specifically rebutted by the appellant-Board, as such, aforesaid defence set up by the appellant-Board, rightly came to be rejected by the learned Single Judge, while passing the impugned order. 12. Since the appellant-Board has not only deviated from PSEB pattern, while granting improved pay scale of Rs. 2100-3700/- to the category of SAS Superintendents (NG) but it also re-designated them as Assistant Accounts Officers, it cannot be permitted at this stage to claim that the PSEB does not allow such benefit. Learned Single Judge rightly recorded that denial of benefit of TBPS to SAS Superintendents (NG) on the ground that after re-designation as Assistant Accounts Officers, such employees were not entitled for the benefit, is clearly prejudicial to such class of employees, because, it is evident from the record that the SAS Superintendents (NG) having pre-revised pay scale of Rs.2000-3500 were given pay scale of Rs. 2200-4000/- with special pay of Rs. 200/- on re-designation, the equivalent of which on revision of pays scales with effect from 1.1.1996 was Rs. 7750-13300. After getting benefit of TBPS, if any, aforesaid category would be placed in the pre-revised pay scale of Rs.2400-4250 after nine years, equivalent of which in revised pay scale after 1.1.996 was Rs.8275-13700. 13. Otherwise also, classification made by the appellant-Board after issuance of communication dated 3.7.2001 is not reasonable one and if permitted to sustain, would treat equals as unequals. It is also not in dispute that once appellant-Board itself decided to introduce TBPS to its employees, after completion of 9/16 years of regular service in the Board and called upon those employees to exercise option to either opt for initial pay scale of Rs.2000-3500/- with initial start of Rs. 2100/- or for improved pay scale of Rs. It is also not in dispute that once appellant-Board itself decided to introduce TBPS to its employees, after completion of 9/16 years of regular service in the Board and called upon those employees to exercise option to either opt for initial pay scale of Rs.2000-3500/- with initial start of Rs. 2100/- or for improved pay scale of Rs. 2100-3700/-, there was no plausible reason available for it to issue communication dated 3.7.2001, thereby clarifying that only those SAS Superintendents (NG), who had completed 9/16 years of service in the induction post of SAS Superintendents (NG), prior to their re-designation as Assistant Accounts Officers, are entitled to benefit of TBPS on PSEB pattern, as the posts of Assistant Accounts Officers do not exist in PSEB, which claim of the appellant-Board is otherwise contrary to the record, as has been taken note herein above. There is no nexus between the classification so made with object, if any, sought to be achieved, as such, order dated 3.7.2001, being totally unreasonable, rightly came to be quashed and set aside by learned Single Judge. 14. There is yet another aspect of the matter that TBPS provides for benefit after completion of 9/16 years of service to a particular category of employees, having maximum pay scale of Rs. 3500/-, which benefit otherwise could not have been withdrawn by the appellant-Board with the issuance of communication dated 12.5.1995, that too, on the ground that the pay scale of SAS Superintendents (NG) has been revised to Rs. 2100-3700/- with effect from 1.1.1986. 15. Consequently in view of above, we find no merit in the appeal and the same is dismissed. Order dated 27.8.2021 passed by learned Single Judge of this Court in CWPOA No. 3782 of 2019, titled HPSEB Supervisory Accounts Services Association v. H.P. State Electricity Board, is upheld. Pending applications, if any, stand disposed of.