Research › Search › Judgment

Uttarakhand High Court · body

2024 DIGILAW 476 (UTT)

Vinod Kumar Sharma v. State of Uttarakhand

2024-07-10

RAVINDRA MAITHANI

body2024
JUDGMENT : (Ravindra Maithani, J.) : The petitioners, who are Radio Operators in the Uttarakhand Police Radio Sanchar Department (“UPRS Department”) challenge the Government Order dated 24.07.2017, by which, the respondent State rejected their representations for claiming the benefit of Government Order No.699/XX-7/2015-01(16)2014 dated 27.07.2015 (“the GO dated 27.07.2015”). The petitioners also claim benefit of Government Order dated 26.07.2015, by which, the Grade Pay of two cadres have been increased from Rs.4600 to Rs.4800 and from Rs.4200 to Rs.4600 respectively. 2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 3. It is the case of the petitioners that initially they were appointed on the post of Assistant Operator in the UPRS Department on 03.08.2009. Thereafter, they were promoted to the post of Head Operator in the month of July, 2013. They are part of Police Department; they are governed by the Uttar Pradesh Police Radio Subordinate Service Rules, 1982 (“1982 Rules”), which were framed under the Uttar Pradesh Provincial Armed Constabulary Act, 1948. In the UPRS Department, there are various posts namely, Assistant Radio Officer, Radio Inspector, Radio Anurakshan Adhikari, Radio Kendra Adhikari, Head Operator/Mechanic and Assistant Operator. 4. According to the petitioners, a Government Order dated 27.07.2015 was issued by which the Grade Pay of Inspector and Sub Inspector Cadre was upgraded from Rs.4600 to Rs.4800 and from Rs.4200 to Rs.4600 respectively. Pursuant to it, the Grade Pay of Radio Kendra Adhikari and Radio Anurakshan Adhikari in the UPRS Department was also upgraded, but the petitioners were declined the benefit. The petitioners did file representations. It did not find favour with the State and, thereafter, the petitioners and others filed various writ petitions before this Court, which were decided by the order dated 05.05.2017, requiring the Principal Secretary (Home), State of Uttarakhand to decide the representations of the petitioners within a stipulated time. It is thereafter, the impugned order dated 24.07.2017 was passed by the respondent State, by which the representations of the petitioners have been rejected. It has been rejected mainly on the following grounds:- (i) Group C & D employees of UPRS Department are governed by the 1982 Rules, whereas Civil Police is regulated by the Uttarakhand Police Regulations and the Uttarakhand Police Act, 2007. (ii) The cadre of the petitioners and Civil Police Sub Inspector are quite different. There is no similarity in it. Their responsibilities are different. Their service Rules are different. (ii) The cadre of the petitioners and Civil Police Sub Inspector are quite different. There is no similarity in it. Their responsibilities are different. Their service Rules are different. Although, Radio Sanchar Department is a Branch of Police Department, but their Cadre has been separately sanctioned. Similarly, the Cadre of the Police Department has been separately sanctioned. (iii) Civil Police is considered on duty at every time and they are posted in any other department or outside the State, but it is not the case with the UPRS Department. The nature of work is different. (iv) Officers of two Cadres namely, Radio Anurakshan Adhikari and Radio Kendra Adhikari were given benefit of the GO dated 27.07.2015, so as to remove the anomaly in their pay-scale. (v) In case, the Grade Pay of Head Operator is upgraded from Rs.4200 to Rs.4600, again anomaly in pay will arise. 5. It is the case of the petitioners that the grounds on which the representations of the petitioners are rejected are baseless. On the one hand, some officers from the UPRS Department have been given benefits of GO dated 27.07.2015, but, on the other hand, the petitioners have been denied the benefit of GO dated 27.07.2015 on the ground that they are not part of the Civil Police. 6. The petitioners claim that the respondents have granted benefits of GO dated 27.07.2015 not only to the Sub Inspector or Inspector Rank Officers, but to Constables, Head Constables, Officers of Fire Service Department, Intelligence Unit also who were at the respective Grade Pay of Rs.4200 or Rs.4600. 7. The State in their counter affidavit has contested the claim of the petitioners. According to the respondent State, by GO dated 27.07.2015, the Grade Pay of the employees working in the cadre of Inspectors and Sub Inspectors have been enhanced from Rs.4600 to Rs.4800 and from Rs.4200 to Rs.4600 respectively. 8. It is the case of the respondent State that the post of the Head Operator in the UPRS Department is not equivalent to Sub Inspector of Civil Police in the Police Department. Hence, there is no parity between both the posts; the works/liabilities are also different for the petitioners and employees working in Civil Police and their service Rules are also different. The structures of both of them are sanctioned separately. 9. Hence, there is no parity between both the posts; the works/liabilities are also different for the petitioners and employees working in Civil Police and their service Rules are also different. The structures of both of them are sanctioned separately. 9. In so far as extending the benefit of GO dated 27.07.2015 to Radio Anurakshan Adhikari and Radio Kendra Adhikari in UPRS Department is concerned, it is the case of the respondent State that the structure of the Police Telephone Department had been sanctioned by the Government Order dated 20.10.2002, in which, the promotional post for the Head Operator has been treated as Radio Station Officer/Radio Anurakshan Adhikari. Since, there was pay anomaly, therefore, to remove the irregularities, a Government Order dated 27.07.2015 was issued, whereby the Grade Pay of Rs.4600 has been sanctioned to the Radio Anurakshan Adhikari and Radio Kendra Adhikari at par in the service cadres. 10. Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the petitioners have been denied benefit of the GO dated 27.07.2015 without any reasons. He would submit that petitioners are part of the Police Department. The grounds of rejection to representations by impugned order dated 24.07.2017 are self-contradictory. On the one hand, in para 5 sub clauses (1), (2) and (3) of impugned order dated 24.07.2017, it is stated that both, the UPRS Department and the Civil Police Department are different on the other hand in para 5 sub clause (4) of the impugned order dated 24.07.2017, it is admitted by the State that two rank officers of the UPRS Department have been given benefit by GO dated 27.07.2015, but it was done to remove anomaly in the pay. It is argued that the GO dated 27.07.2015 is not for removal of any anomaly; it is for grant of upgradation of scales of two Rank Officers, who were getting Grade Pay of Rs.4600 and Rs.4200; it is increased from Rs.4600 to Rs.4800 and from Rs.4200 to Rs.4600 respectively. Therefore, this benefit ought to have been granted to the petitioners as well. 11. Learned counsel for the petitioner would also refer to various annexures, which he filed along with the rejoinder affidavit dated 03.05.2024 to argue that, in fact, Head Constables, Constables, Officers of the Fire Service Department, PAC Personnel have been granted benefit of GO dated 27.07.2015. Therefore, this benefit ought to have been granted to the petitioners as well. 11. Learned counsel for the petitioner would also refer to various annexures, which he filed along with the rejoinder affidavit dated 03.05.2024 to argue that, in fact, Head Constables, Constables, Officers of the Fire Service Department, PAC Personnel have been granted benefit of GO dated 27.07.2015. Although, reference has been made to all those information, but particularly, one information, which was given by the Director General of Police on 22.08.2022 (part of Annexure No.6 to the rejoinder affidavit dated 03.05.2024) has been referred, in which, it is stated that the benefit of GO dated 27.07.2015 has been given to the Civil Police, Armed Police, Intelligence, Police Telecommunication, Fire Service, Clerical Cadre, etc. 12. It is argued that rejection order on the ground that only regular Civil Police Department Personnel get the benefit of GO dated 27.07.2015 is incorrect. Reference has been made to various other information received under RTI, which revealed that, in fact, personnel in the cadre of Constable, Head Constable were also granted benefit of the GO dated 27.07.2015. 13. On the other hand, learned State counsel would submit that the petitioners have no claim. He would submit that the Grade Pay of the Radio Anurakshan Adhikari and Radio Kendra Adhikari of UPRS Department was raised so as to remove the anomaly by the GO dated 27.07.2015. He would submit that the petitioners cannot claim parity with any other personnel of outside cadre and for that purpose, they have to show that what was their qualifications, eligibilities, mode of selection, nature and quality of work, status of posts, which should be identical. It is argued that the petitioners have not established it. Therefore, they cannot claim parity with those other personnel, who have been given benefit of GO dated 27.07.2015. 14. It is also argued that the petitioners are not equivalent to Sub Inspector; they are equivalent to Assistant Sub Inspector; therefore, they are not entitled to GO dated 27.07.2015. 15. It is argued that the petitioners have not established it. Therefore, they cannot claim parity with those other personnel, who have been given benefit of GO dated 27.07.2015. 14. It is also argued that the petitioners are not equivalent to Sub Inspector; they are equivalent to Assistant Sub Inspector; therefore, they are not entitled to GO dated 27.07.2015. 15. The Court wanted to know from the learned State counsel that the annexures, which have been filed along with the rejoinder affidavit dated 03.05.2024 of the petitioners reveals that the benefit of GO dated 27.07.2015 has been granted not only to the Inspector and Sub Inspector, but it has been granted to Drivers, Head Constables, Fire Service Officers and Constables (Annexure No.3, 4 and 6 to the rejoinder affidavit filed on 03.05.2024). The Court posed a question that if the benefit of GO dated 27.07.2015 was to grant only to the Civil Police Officer of the Rank of Inspectors and Sub Inspectors, why the benefit was granted to the Drivers, Constables, Head Constables, Fire Service Officers, Intelligence Unit and PAC? 16. The petitioners are not claiming the pay parity, it is not the case of the petitioners that there is any anomaly in their pay, which needs to be rectified. A very simple issue has been raised by the petitioners that they should be given benefit of GO dated 27.07.2015 because they are also at the Grade Pay of Rs.4200. 17. As stated, earlier also the petitioners had filed the petitions, in which, the directions were given to the State to decide their representations, which has been decided and rejected. 18. In the impugned rejection order dated 24.07.2015 (at Annexure No.8 to the writ petition), the grounds which have been mentioned in para 5 of this impugned order are, in fact, self-contradictory. On the one hand, in para 5, sub-clauses (1), (2) and (3), it is stated that the petitioners are not part of the Civil Police Department, their nature, duties, cadres and Rules are different, but in para 5, sub-clause (4), the respondent State admits that Radio Anurakshan Adhikari and Radio Kendra Adhikari have been given benefit of GO dated 27.07.2015 so as to remove the pay anomaly. State has not filed any separate GO by which such anomaly was removed, which means that by virtue of GO dated 27.07.2015, of which benefit the petitioners seek, the Grade Pay of Radio Anurakshan Adhikari and Radio Kendra Adhikari was enhanced. GO dated 27.07.2015 is Annexure No.5 to the writ petition. It has not been issued to remove the pay anomaly of Radio Anurakshan Adhikari and Radio Kendra Adhikari. It is the simplicitor GO for enhancing Grade Pay of Officers of different cadre. Therefore, the ground of rejection of the representations of the petitioners does not merit any acceptance. 19. It has been brought to the notice of the Court that the respondent State has given benefit of the GO dated 27.07.2015 not only to Inspectors and Sub Inspectors of the Grade Pay of Rs.4600 and Rs.4200 respectively, but to the Drivers, Constables, Head Constables, Fireman. It was not only given to the personnel of the Civil Police Department, but to the personnel of Intelligence Unit, Fire Service Department, Armed Police, Police Traffic, Police Clerical Cadre, PAC and Police Radio Services also. 20. For the foregoing discussion, it is clear that the respondent State has granted benefit of GO dated 27.07.2015 not only to the Officers of Civil Police Department, but to various other departments, as stated hereinbefore. It is also established and shown by the petitioners that this benefit was not given only to the Inspectors and Sub Inspectors, but to others also including Drivers, Constables, Head Constables, who were at that Grade Pay, which were to be enhanced by the GO dated 27.07.2015. In view of this, the denial of benefit of GO dated 27.07.2015 to the petitioners cannot be upheld. Accordingly, the petition deserves to be allowed. 21. The petition is allowed. 22. The impugned order dated 27.07.2017 is hereby quashed. 23. The respondent State is directed to extend the benefit of GO dated 27.07.2015 to the petitioners within a period of three months from today.