Narasimha Rao Asula Vn And ORS v. Union Of India & ANR.

$~2 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 5211/2020 NARASIMHA RAO ASULA VN AND ORS ..... Petitioner Through:

Mr. Kailash Prashad Pandey, Adv.

Versus

UNION OF INDIA & ANR.

..... Respondents Through:

Mr. Arun Bhardwaj, CGSC with Mr.

Abhishek Sharma & Mr. Nikhil Bhardwaj, Advs.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE ASHA MENON

O R D E R

% 13.08.2020 [VIA VIDEO CONFERENCING] CM No.18803/2020 (for exemption) 1.

Allowed, subject to just exceptions and as per the extant rules. 2.

The application is disposed of.

W.P.(C) 5211/2020 3.

The 77 petitioners, having been directly appointed between the years 1997 to 2005, to the post of Head Constables [Driver/Driver-cum-Pump Operators (DCPOs)] in the respondents Central Industrial Security Force (CISF), have filed this petition seeking fixation of their basic pay at Rs.7,510/- instead of Rs.6,750/-, i.e., basic pay equivalent to other similarly placed Head Constables in the respondents CISF; direction for payment of arrears of pay w.e.f. 1st January, 2006 is also sought. 4.

It is not necessary for us to record the facts, it being the plea of the petitioners that they are fully covered by Vinoj V.V. and Ors. V. Union of India & Ors. 2018 SCC OnLine Del 12714 and petitioners wherein were

also Head Constables (Driver/DCPO) in the respondents CISF and vide the said judgment, have been directed to be paid basic pay of Rs.7,510/-, at par with other Head Constables, w.e.f. 1st January, 2006, with arrears being paid within eight weeks therefrom.

5.

None appears for the respondents Central Industrial Security Force (CISF) though stated to be served by advance notice. 6.

We have contacted Mr. Arun Bhardwaj, Advocate and he has appeared and we have requested him to accept notice and informed him that the petitioners herein are claiming the same relief as granted in Vinoj V.V. supra and seeking the same order as order dated 29th July, 2020 in W.P.(C) No.4679/2020 titled Vijesh Kumar M & Ors. Vs. Union of India & Anr., Annexure-P7 to the petition.

7.

Mr. Arun Bhardwaj, Advocate has fairly stated that if the respondents have an opportunity to examine the case of each of the petitioners, as was granted in order dated 29th July, 2020 supra, this petition may be disposed of in terms of the said order.

8.

We accordingly dispose of this petition by directing the respondents CISF to, within six weeks, examine the case of each of the 77 petitioners and if the petitioners or any of them are found entitled to the relief as granted to the petitioners in Vinoj V.V. supra, to grant the same relief to the petitioners/such of the petitioners, as are found similarly placed as petitioners in Vinoj V.V. (supra) and to release the arrears due within a further period of four weeks therefrom. If the petitioners or any of the petitioners are not found to be covered by Vinoj V.V. (supra), the respondents CISF to, within six weeks aforesaid, inform the petitioners or

such of the petitioners, who, according to the respondents CISF, are not covered by the judgment, of the same, in writing, giving reasons.

9. The petition is disposed of.

RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW, J ASHA MENON, J AUGUST 13, 2020 'gsr'..