Research › Search › Judgment

Himachal Pradesh High Court · body

2025 DIGILAW 447 (HP)

S. P. Katyal v. State of H. P.

2025-03-22

JYOTSNA REWAL DUA

body2025
JUDGMENT : Jyotsna Rewal Dua , J. The petitioner served as Member of Himachal Pradesh Private Educational Institutions Regulatory Commission (HPPEIRC) w.e.f. 28.06.2017 to 29.06.2020. He seeks a direction to the respondents to pay him the emoluments for the period as have been made admissible to the Secretary to the Government of Himachal Pradesh alongwith interest. 2. Facts 2(i) On 28.06.2017, respondents notified appointment of the petitioner as Member of HPPEIRC for a period of three years from the date of his joining as such or until he attained the age of 65 years whichever was earlier. This notification was issued in exercise of powers conferred under Section 4(2) of the Himachal Pradesh Private Educational Institutions (Regulatory Commission) Act 2010 (hereinafter called the Act). 2(ii) A separate notification was issued on 31.08.2017 in exercise of powers conferred under Rule 3 of the HPPEIRC Rules, 2011 containing the terms and conditions of services of petitioner as Member HPPEIRC. As per this notification the petitioner was entitled to receive total emoluments, pay and allowances as admissible to the Secretary to the Government of H.P. from time to time. 2(iii) On assuming the charge of Member HPPEIRC, the petitioner was paid following monthly emoluments:- Pay Grade Pay ADA @ 137% Interim Relief @ 5% Special Pay HCA Cap. Allowance HRA Conv. Allowance Livery Gross Salary 37400 10000 64938 2370 0 250 400 2000 0 0 117358 2(iv) Petitioner raised a grievance with the respondents that as per notification dated 31.08.2017, he was entitled to monthly emoluments, pay and allowances as admissible to the Secretary to the Government of Himachal Pradesh from time to time but he has not being paid these emoluments at par with those of Secretary to the Government of Himachal Pradesh. That monthly emoluments paid to him were far less than enjoyed by the Secretary to the Government of Himachal Pradesh. Representations dated 12.12.2018, 25.06.2019 and 28.05.2020 in this regard made to the respondents are at Annexure P-8-colly. The case record shows that the petitioner had been representing to the respondents time and again seeking monthly emoluments, pay and allowance at par with Secretary to the Government of Himachal Pradesh from time to time. Respondent No.2-the HPPEIRC many times forwarded the case of the petitioner to respondent No.1, respondent No.1, however, declined to accept the prayer, hence, the petition. 3. Respondent No.2-the HPPEIRC many times forwarded the case of the petitioner to respondent No.1, respondent No.1, however, declined to accept the prayer, hence, the petition. 3. Submissions 3(i) Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that respondents had retrospectively released emoluments for the post of Secretary to the Government of Himachal Pradesh flowing under 6 th & 7 th pay commission. The period for which emoluments of Secretary underwent enhancement, covered the period for which petitioner had served as a Member HPPEIRC. In view of the terms and conditions of his service, petitioner is also entitled to the same emoluments. Respondent’ action of not releasing him these emoluments runs contrary to the terms and conditions of his service. 3(ii) Simple stand of learned counsel for respondent No.2- the HPPEIRC is that respondent No.2 is bound by decision of respondent-State. Respondent No.2 had forwarded the case of the petitioner to respondent No.1 but respondent No.1 turned it down. 3(iii) Learned Advocate General on the strength of reply filed by respondent No.1 contended that the case of the petitioner was examined in consultation with the Finance Department. On 06.08.2022, the Finance Department had advised that the petitioner being Member of Private Educational Institution was not covered under 6 th and 7 th pay commission and for that reason, he was not entitled for the benefits flowing from 6 th & 7 th pay commission. 4. Consideration Heard learned counsel for the parties and considered the case file. 4(i) Petitioner was appointed as Member of HPPEIRC for a period of three years on 28.06.2017. It is not in dispute that he continued to be a Member till 29.6.2020. Petitioner’s aforesaid appointment was in terms of the HPPEIRC Act 2010. Rule 3 of the HPPEIRC Rules 2011 lays down terms and conditions of service of Chairperson and Members. Sub Rule (1) thereof inter-alia states that Member of the Commission shall receive pay, allowance as admissible to the Secretary to the Government of H.P. from time to time. Rule 3 (1) of the HPPEIRC Rules, reads as under:- “3. Rule 3 of the HPPEIRC Rules 2011 lays down terms and conditions of service of Chairperson and Members. Sub Rule (1) thereof inter-alia states that Member of the Commission shall receive pay, allowance as admissible to the Secretary to the Government of H.P. from time to time. Rule 3 (1) of the HPPEIRC Rules, reads as under:- “3. Terms and Conditions of service of Chairperson and Members- (1) The Chairperson and members shall receive pay and allowances as admissible to the Principal Secretary and Secretary respectively to the Government from time to time.” 4(ii) As a corollary to the above provision, the respondents issued a separate notification on 31.08.2017 detailing the terms and conditions of service of the petitioner as Member HPPEIRC. As per condition No.2, petitioner was to get such emoluments, pay and allowances as admissible to the Secretary to the Government of H.P. from time to time. The condition reads as under:- “2. Pay: He shall be entitled to get such total monthly emoluments and shall receive pay and allowances as admissible to the Secretary to the Government from time to time.” 4(iii) In view of above, it cannot be disputed that the petitioner is entitled to get such monthly emoluments, pay and allowances as are admissible to the Secretary to the Government of H.P. from time to time. Petitioner during currency of his appointment as Member of Commissioner was paid Rs. 37400/- (Pay), Rs.10,000/- (Grade Pay), Rs.64938/- (ADA), Rs. 2370/- (Interim relief), Rs.250 (HCA), Rs. 400 (Cap. Allowance) Rs.2000 (HRA) i.e. Rs.117358/- ( Gross Salary). 4(iv) Soon after petitioner’s appointment as Member of HPPEIRC, he started raising grievance with the respondents that monthly emoluments, pay and allowances being paid to him are far less than paid to the Secretary to the Government of H.P. The writ record shows several representations preferred by the petitioner to the respondents in this regard. Many times petitioner’s case file went back and forth from respondents No.2 to respondent No.1. However his grievances were not redressed. Petitioner therefore instituted this writ petition on 11.07.2022. Many times petitioner’s case file went back and forth from respondents No.2 to respondent No.1. However his grievances were not redressed. Petitioner therefore instituted this writ petition on 11.07.2022. 4(v) The gist of the respondents’ defence is that the Finance Department had not concurred in releasing the benefits flowing from 6 th & 7 th pay commission to the petitioner as petitioner was not a government employee; His case is not covered under 6 th & 7 th pay commission under which payscales of government employees underwent revision. At this stage, it will be appropriate to extract the reasoning of the Finance Department from Annexure R-2/1 dated 06.08.2022. "………….Examined. The case of Sh. S.P. Katyal Former Member, H.P. Private Educational Institutions is neither covered under 7 th CPC nor 6 th Pay Commission under which payscales of the State Govt. employees have been revised vide notification dated 03.01.2022. The service conditions of Dr. S.P. Katyal were separately governed in terms of notification dated 31.08.2017. He has been engaged/appointed vide Notification dated 28.06.2017 for a period of three years and this period was completed in the year 2020. Therefore admissibility of 6th or 7th pay commission is not made out to Dr. S.P. Katyal Former Member, H.PPERC……..." The reasons offered by the Finance Department as also relied upon by the respondents for rejecting petitioner’s prayer are fallacious. No doubt petitioner was not a regular employee of the State Government. However as put forth by the Finance Department, the terms and conditions of petitioner’s service were governed by a separate notification dated 31.08.2017, which in turn was based upon Rule 3(1) of the HPPEIRC Rules, 2011. The relevant pay condition as incorporated in the notification issued on 31.08.2017 stated ‘petitioner shall be entitled to get such total monthly emoluments and shall receive pay and allowances as admissible to the Secretary to the Government from time to time.’ Petitioner therefore was entitled to the emoluments payable to the Secretary to the Government of Himachal Pradesh. The payment to him is further qualified by use of words ‘from time to time’. Hence all subsequent revision of the emoluments, pay, allowances for the post of Secretary revising the same retrospectively for the period during which petitioner served as member HPPEIRC, are also required to be paid to the petitioner. Petitioner’s entitlement to the relief, flows from the notification dated 31.08.2017. Hence all subsequent revision of the emoluments, pay, allowances for the post of Secretary revising the same retrospectively for the period during which petitioner served as member HPPEIRC, are also required to be paid to the petitioner. Petitioner’s entitlement to the relief, flows from the notification dated 31.08.2017. According to the Finance Department service conditions of the petitioner were separately governed in terms of notification dated 31.08.2017 and he had been appointed only for a period of 3 years. He completed this period in the year 2020. This has been taken a reason for denying him the admissibility of benefits flowing under 6 th & 7 th pay commission. The grounds taken by the respondents for denying the relief to the petitioner are untenable. No doubt petitioner’s service conditions are governed vide notification dated 31.08.2017, however, that notification itself says that petitioner shall be entitled to get total monthly emoluments, pay and allowances as are admissible to the Secretary to the Government of H.P. from time to time. Notification containing terms of pay and allowances was issued in consonance with Rule 3(1) of the HPPEIRC Rules, 2011. During hearing on 28.02.2025, learned Deputy Advocate General was directed to have instructions as to whether pay of the Secretary, which was to be given to the petitioner as per his appointment notification dated 31.08.2017 had underwent any revision retrospectively for the period in question. In compliance, learned Additional Advocate General has placed on record instructions dated 21.03.2025 from the Secretary (Education) to the Government of Himachal Pradesh. As per these instructions:- “It is intimated that consequent upon revision of the pay scale of All India Services, the State Government has already revised the pay scales of the members of All India Services serving under the State Government w.e.f. 01.01.2016”. The instructions memo further states as under that pay of the Officer of the rank of Secretary to the Government has also undergone revision retrospectively covering the period in question:- “In view of the advice of the Advisory Department i.e.Personnel, this Department is of the view that th pay revision in respect of members of All India Service has undergone revision and therefore the pay of the Officer of the rank of Secretary to the Government has also undergone revision retrospectively. The Indian Administrative Service (Pay) Rules, 2016 provides that Secretary to Government shall draw Level 14 of the Pay Matrix, which is a revision over existing pay provided to the Officer of the rank of Secretary to Government. (The copies of the relevant rules and Pay matrix is enclosed.).” Thus, the respondents have clearly admitted that the State Government has revised the pay scale of the Secretary to the Government. The Secretary to the Government has been drawing Level-14 of the Pay Matrix under Indian Administrative Service (Pay) Rules, 2016 for the period during which petitioner served as Member HPPEIRC. That being the position, the petitioner, who is entitled under Rule 3(1) of the HPPEIRC Rules 2011 and the notification of his appointment dated 31.08.2017, to the emoluments, pay, allowances to the post of Secretary to Government of Himachal Pradesh is certainly entitled to the Level 14 of the Pay Matrix, which has been allowed to the Secretary to the Government of Himachal Pradesh w.e.f. 01.01.2016. 5. In view of above discussion, this petition is allowed. Petitioner is held entitled to Level 14 of the Pay Matrix, which has been allowed to the Secretary to the Government of Himachal Pradesh w.e.f. 01.01.2016, for the period in question. All consequential benefits including difference of pay, emoluments, allowancess etc. admissible to the petitioner for the period he remained Member HPPEIRC be released in his favour within six weeks, failing which the same shall be payable with 5% interest from due date. The instant petition is disposed of in above terms. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, also stand disposed of.