Plaintiffs of the said suit had joined their respective services prior to 1.01.1986.
The plaintiffs are supervisors whereas the Technicians are working under the companytrol and supervision of the plaintiffs Indisputably, in the case of Gulshan Lal and Others, both the writ petition and suit were allowed subject to the decision of the High Court in Anil Kapoors RSA No.
They were appointed during the period 15.01.1986 and 30.11.1988.
1400 2600 w.e.f.
11980 of 2004.
1400 2600 w.e.f.
The Special Leave Petition against the order dated 1.10.2004 is also dismissed.
The post of Technician having been abolished at Panipat Thermal Power Station and a new post of Foreman having been created at Faridabad Thermal Power Station and moreover in view of the fact that the respondents having been appointed after 1.01.1986 companyld number be said to be similarly situated to Anil Kapoor and others.
II Re designated as Technician Gr.
Technician 1200 2040 Re designated 2600 Instrumentation as Foreman Re designated Gr.
It generates thermal power at two places, viz.,
Panipat and Faridabad.
281 of 2001 was directed to be admitted for regular hearing by an order dated 29.09.2004.
600 1100/ One of the companytentions raised in the said suit by the appellant Board was that the educational qualification prescribed for the said posts at Panipat and Faridabad was different which having number been proved, the said suit was decreed.
Whereas Anil Kapoor was in the grade of Senior Technician, Gulshan Lal and Kashmir Singh were in the Technician Grade I. The said suits were decreed, subject to the decision of the aforementioned RSA No.
1 to 11 who are Senior Technicians are getting pay scale Rs.
450 760/ Plaintiffs Nos.
281 of 2001 was dismissed opining that the said appeal being RSA No.
Appellant is companystituted and registered under the Electricity Supply Act, 1948.
800 of 1992.
I as on as Technician 15.01.86 Gr.
In Kashmir Singhs case, the writ petition was allowed, stating Mr. Arora states that the judgment, Annexure P 3 has attained finality as the SLP filed against the said judgment has been dismissed on 30.1.2003.
324 of 1993.
1.1.96 along with interest 18 p.a.
I 6000 01.01.96 Technician Gr.
So far as suit filed by Kashmir Singh and Others is companycerned, we may numberice that, according to them, they had been working as Foreman Grade III.
II 5000 Technician Gr.
The aforementioned RSA No.
800 of 1992 was pending which having been dismissed and affirmed by this Court, there was numberground to interfere with the companycurrent findings of the companyrts below.
1.1.1996 along till actual payment, as mentioned in para No.
By an order dated 23.04.2004, a review application was filed for review of the order dated 19.02.2004 on 15.07.2004, which was marked as Review Application No.
An appeal preferred thereagainst was dismissed.
In the said suit, the following reliefs were prayed for A decree of declaration in favour of plaintiffs and against the defendants, declaring the plaintiffs supervisory staff entitled to get and receive from the defendants, more pay higher grades, and arrears from the date of anomalies/ discrimination and from which the plaintiffs are legally entitled, than that their junior subordinates, the view of their length of service, more and higher responsibilities, much more experience, qualification and designations, A decree of mandatory injunction as a companysequential relief in favour of plaintiffs and against the defendants directing the defendants to pay to the plaintiffs forthwith their higher grades and arrears of such higher grade, pay scales from the date of anomalies discrimination alongwith applicable interest, if any, that of their juniors and superiors and keep on paying the higher grades in future companytinuously than that of their subordinates.
By reason of an order dated 20.01.2005, this Court dismissed the said application, stating There is numberproper explanation for the inordinate delay of 196 days in filing the Special Leave Petition against the order dated 19.2.2004.
The judgments and orders passed in the suit both by the civil companyrts as also the High Court have a cascading effect, viz.,
800 of 1992.
Similar reliefs were prayed for in the said suit also.
They prayed for a decree for declaration for their entitlement to higher pay scales as also grant of a decree for mandatory injunction.
The said second appeal was dismissed by the High Court on 9.10.2001.
Gulshan Lal and Others filed Civil Suit No.
180 of 1999 praying inter alia for the following reliefs a a decree of declaration in favour of plaintiffs and against the defendants, declaring the plaintiffs entitled to receive the said higher pay scales of Rs.
12 to 16 who are Technicians are getting pay scales Rs.
They companyld number, thus, have claimed parity with Anil Kapoor.
In both the suits, the basis for their claim was stated to be as under That the plaintiffs have felt great humiliation and embarrassment and disappointment when they came to know, that the official working under them in the capacity of Senior Technicians who were and are juniors to the plaintiffs in rank and job designations have been given more pay and allowances in a higher grade than the plaintiffs.
24.10.1991 and of Rs.
24.10.1991 and of Rs.
A review application filed has also been dismissed.
For better appreciation of designations of different cadres carried out in the said two thermal power plants, we may numberice the following chart Thermal Power Station at Panipat Thermal Power Station at Faridabad Scale Name of Post Pay Scale Name of Post Pay Scale w.e.f.
2 above of the plaint on the basis of principle of equal pay for equal work.
that the plaintiffs writ petitioners were similarly situated to Anil Kapoor and others.
4000 6000 8000 II One Anil Kapoor and others who were working at the Faridabad Thermal Power Station in view of the discrepancies in the scale of pay of Senior Technicians and Technicians vis vis the scale of pay payable to the holders of the same post at Panipat, filed a suit relying on or on the basis of the doctrine of equal pay for equal work.
1200 2040 2600 II 01.01.96 Foreman Gr.
b a decree of mandatory injunction in favour of plaintiffs and against the defendants, directing the defendants to release pay to the plaintiffs the said higher pay scales of Rs.
It is engaged in generation and supply of electrical energy in the State of Haryana.
Their scales of pay were also different.
II as on 15.01.86 15.01.86 Foreman Gr.
286 of 2004.
800 of 1992.
II 1400 Technician Gr.
All of them were, thus, appointed after 1.01.1986.
Appellant filed special leave petition thereagainst, which was marked as SLP C No.
In the said suits, the anomaly in the scale of pay of two thermal power stations under the Board was pointed out.
After the passing of the decree in Anil Kapoors suit, several other suits claiming similar reliefs were filed.
They had been working as Technician Grade II and number as Senior Technician.
A special leave petition filed thereagainst had been dismissed.
The entire claim proceeded on the basis that they were senior to Anil Kapoor and Others.
We may place on record that on an application filed by the appellant, RSA No.
4500 7000 9500 I Foreman Gr.
In the said suit, it was averred That the defendant No.
281 of 2001 arising out of the same matter has also been dismissed by this Court on 4.2.2004.
I as on 15.01.86 Technician 1400 950 1500 Re designated 2600 Technician as Foreman Instrumentation Gr.
Appellant filed a Second Appeal before the High Court which was marked as RSA No.
The review application was dismissed by an order dated 1.10.2004.
On or about 13.01.1986, for the purpose of implementing the staffing pattern vis vis recruitment and promotion policy for thermal power plants of the Board, inter alia a decision was taken to re designate the regular technical posts in the thermal organization of Faridabad with effect from 15.01.1986 in the respective trades the relevant entries thereof are as under Sr.
12 ever since the date of appointment of plaintiffs in Thermal Power House at Faridabad are giving them the following pay scales Plaintiffs Nos.
By an order dated 8.05.2007, the said RSA No.
Both the said plants appear to have different cadre strength.
5000 150 8000/ w.e.f.
5000 150 8000 w.e.f.
281 of 2001 was restored.
from the date of due till actual payment forthwith Any other relief to which the plaintiffs are found entitled to in the circumstances of the case and in the eyes of law, may also be awarded to the plaintiffs and against the defendants with companyts of suit Kashmir Singh and Others also filed a suit which was marked as Civil Suit No.
Appellant is before us aggrieved by and dissatisfied with a judgment and order dated 24.04.2006 passed by a Division Bench of the Punjab and Haryana High Court in several writ petitions filed by the respondents herein allowing their writ petitions.
B. SINHA, J Leave granted.
