Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner.
Initially the writ petition was filed by the petitioner seeking for a direction to the Senior Divisional Security Commissioner, Railway Protection Force, Northern Railway, Lucknow (opposite party no.4) to decide the representation of the petitioner.
During the pendency of writ petition, the representation of the petitioner has been decided by opposite party no.4 vide order dated 04.12.2002. Thereafter, the petitioner has challenged the order dated 04.12.2002 through an amendment application, which was allowed vide order dated 10.02.2004. The petitioner was died on 06.02.2013 and the heir of the petitioner has filed a substitution application, which has been allowed vide order dated 16.09.2013.
Learned Counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the opposite parties no.4 has passed the impugned order dated 04.12.2002 in mechanical manner without assigning any reason. Learned Counsel for the petitioner has invited the attention of this Court towards the order dated 22.04.2011 passed by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Writ Petition No.6553 (SS) of 2003 (Ramesh Chandra Shukla Vs. The Union of India and others) and submitted that in the said writ petition, the similar issue as involved in the instant petition has been settled and, therefore, it would be appropriate to direct the authority competent to consider his case in the light of the judgment and order dated 22.04.2011 passed in Writ Petition No.6553 (SS) of 2003 and also considering the provisions of Clause 3 of Chapter 9 of the Financial Handbook, which provides for stepping up of pay of senior for a second time in order to remove an anomaly in pay vis-a-vis same junior admissible.
The Clause 3 reads as under:
" (3) Stepping up of pay of senior for a second time in order to remove an anomaly in pay vis-a-vis smae junior admissible. - It has been clarified by the Comptroller and Auditor - General [ C & AG Decision (2) below FR 22] that stepping up of pay of the senior is allowed only once with reference to the pay of the first junior (not necessarily immediately junior), even if he is entitled to the benefit with reference to second junior also promoted subsequently. However, Government have issued orders that after the senior's pay has been stepped up with reference to his junior, if the pay of that junior is stepped up with reference to another junior, the pay of the senior can be stepped up for a second time with reference to the first junior."
I have heard learned Counsel for the parties and perused the record.
Considering the submissions of learned Counsel for the petitioner and after perusal of the record especially the impugned order dated 04.12.2002 and without entering into the merits of the case, the instant writ petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to approach the authority competent by way of an application stating all his grievance within a period of 15 days from today. In case, the petitioner prefers such application, the authority competent shall consider and decide the grievance of the petitioner, in accordance with law and taking into consideration the observations made in the order dated 22.04.2011 passed in Writ Petition No.6553 (SS) of 2003 and also the provisions of Clause 3 as quoted above, within a period of three months from the date of production of certified copy of this order along with application. While considering the grievance of the petitioner, the authority competent shall ignore the impugned order dated 04.12.2002.
Order Date :- 27.9.2019 akverma