Krishan Kumar v. The U.T. Of Chd. & ORS.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH **** Date of Decision: 13.11.2025 KRISHAN KUMAR
...Petitioner
Vs.
THE U.T. OF CHD. & ORS.
...Respondents
CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAGMOHAN BANSAL Present:- Mr. Karundeep Singh, Advocate for the petitioner Mr. Indresh Goel, Advocate for respondents No.2 and 3 *** JAGMOHAN BANSAL, J. (ORAL) 1.
On 03.09.2025, the following order was passed by this Court:- "1.
The petitioner is claiming pay scale of ₹40206200/-. The petitioner was appointed as Work Charged Electrician on regular basis in 2005. He was extended pay scale of ₹3120-5160/-. The respondent has rejected his claim on the ground that he has been granted pay scale as attached to the post. The respondent in the reply has clarified that petitioner cannot claim parity with Avtar Singh and Ram Gopal because they have not been granted pay scale of ₹ 4020-6200/-. They were not granted higher pay scales. The petitioner has pointed out appointment letter of Salinder Kumar who was appointed as Work Charge Junior Technician (Electrician). The respondent granted pay scale of ₹ 4020-6200/- to Salinder Kumar. Similar is the case of U.K. Singh.
-22.
Faced with this, learned counsel for respondent Nos.2 and 3 seeks short accommodation to clarify whether respondent has granted pay scale of ₹ 4020-6200/- to any employee who was holding post equivalent to the post of petitioner.
3.
Adjourned to 30.09.2025."
2.
Mr. Indresh Goel, learned counsel for the respondents No.2 and 3 during the course of hearing submitted letter dated 26.09.2025 of Chandigarh Housing Board addressed to him. The said communication is taken on record. Registry is directed to tag the same at an appropriate place.
3.
The relevant extracts of communication dated 26.09.2025 are reproduced as below:- "The clarification regarding the difference between scales granted to Sh. U.K. Singh and Sh. Krishan Kumar, in annotated form is as under:- Sh.
Krishan Kumar, J.T Sh. U.K Singh, J.T (Elect.) (Elect.) (Senior) (Junior)
1. Promoted from Trade Mate
1. Direct recruited/appointed to Junior Technician in as Junior Technician Grade-II Electrical cadre on 03.02.2005 in Electrical cadre on (Regular Employee) in the pay 13.11.2007 vide appointment scale of Rs. 3120-5160.
letter No.4422 dated 13.11.2007 as purely work charged employee in the pay scale of Rs. 4020-6200.
2. The fifth pay commission by
2. The fifth pay commission by the Punjab Govt. notified vide the Punjab Govt. notified vide No.05/10/09-5FPI/207 dated No.05/10/09-5FPI/207 dated
-327.05.2009 and consequent 27.05.2009 and consequent upon it adoption by Chd. Admn.
upon it adoption by Chd.
Vide letter No.4029 dated Admn. Vide letter No.4029 11.06.2009 and further adopted dated 11.06.2009 and further by CHB vide letter No.627 adopted by CHB vide letter dated 22.06.2009, the revised No.627 dated 22.06.2009, the pay scale granted to Sh.
revised pay scale granted to Krishan Kumar, JT was Rs.
Sh. U.K. Singh, JT was Rs.
5910-20200+1900 GP 5910-20200+1900 GP 01.01.2006 vide office order 01.01.2006 vide office order No.162 dated 24.08.2009.
No.212 dated 26.10.2009.
3. As per the Govt of Punjab
3. As per the Govt. of Punjab vide their letter- No.5/10/09vide their letter No.5/10/095FPI/958 dated 15.12.2011 and 5FPI/958 dated 15.12.2011 it adopted by Chd. Admn. Vide and it adopted by Chd. Admn.
letter No.1496 dated Vide letter No.1496 dated 14.02.2012 and further adopted 14.02.2012 and further by CHB vide letterNo.580 adopted by CHB vide letter dated 26.03.2012, the revised No.580 dated 26.03.2012, the grade pay granted to Sh.
revised grade pay granted to Krishan Kumar, J.T was Rs.
Sh. U.K Singh, J.T was Rs.
5910-20200+ GP 2400.
5910-20200+ GP 2800.
As per above facts, it is mentioned that the Sh. Krishan Kumar, Junior Technician was not fulfilling the conditions of step up of pay, vide clause (a), (b) & (c) of Note 6 under Rule 7 of Punjab Govt. notified vide no. 05/10/09-5FPI/207 dated 27.05.2009 duly adopted by Chandigarh Administration and Chandigarh Housing Board (Annexure-I), stated that:- "(a) both the junior and the senior govt. employees should belong to the same cadre and the post in which they have been promoted should be identical in the same cadre.
(b) the pre revised scale of pay and the revised grade pay of the lower and higher posts in which they are entitled to draw pay should be identical.
-4- (c) the senior govt. employees at the time of promotion should have been drawing equal or more pay than the junior." In this regard, it is made clear that the pay scale of Sh. Krishan Kumar and his junior Sh.U.K Singh were not identical, therefore, his pay cannot be stepped up equal to the pay of Sh. U.K Singh."
4.
From the perusal of above communication, it is evident that there is no discrimination or violation of rights of petitioner. He has already retired on attaining the age of superannuation. 5.
In the wake of above discussion and findings, this Court is of the considered opinion that the instant petition deserves to be dismissed and accordingly dismissed.
6.
Pending application(s), if any, stands disposed of. (JAGMOHAN BANSAL) JUDGE November 13, 2025 Deepak DPA Whether Speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No