http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 2  

PETITIONER: DR. P.N. PURI & ORS.

       Vs.

RESPONDENT: STATE OF U.P. & ORS.

DATE OF JUDGMENT:       29/01/1996

BENCH: RAMASWAMY, K. BENCH: RAMASWAMY, K. G.B. PATTANAIK (J)

CITATION:  JT 1996 (2)   472        1996 SCALE  (2)210

ACT:

HEADNOTE:

JUDGMENT:                       O R D E R      The petitioner  filed a writ petition in the High Court for direction  to pay  the equal  pay on  par  with  Medical Officer at  Rs.2200-4000/-. There  was  a  long  controversy regarding the  entitlement  of  the  petitioners  and  their companions for  the said  scale of  pay. Ultimately,  it was referred to  the Anamoly  Committee which had decided in his proceedings dated  1.1.1995 accepting  the new pay scales of different posts  in the  Urban  Local  bodies,  namely,  the persons like  the petitioners would be paid the scale of pay at Rs.2200-4000/- and recommended to upgrade the said  scale from November 7, 1994 and to pay the scales of pay from that date. The  Government has  accepted the above recommendation and issued  orders on  February 16, 1995. Calling that order in question,  the petitioners  have filed  the writ petition seeking payment of arrears from 1986.      Initially,  direction   were  given  by  the  Court  to consider why  the petitioners  were not  being  paid  w.e.f. 1.1.1986. After consideration again, the respondent filed an affidavit explaining  the circumstances. Undoubtedly, one of the circumstances stated was that previously the petitioners were unequals  and were  not being  paid the  same pay  and, therefore, they  were not entitled to the same scale of pay. The Division  bench of the High Court dismissed the petition by order dated September 21, 1995.      It  is   contended  by  the  learned  counsel  for  the petitioners that  the reason given by the respondents is not relevant since  the Anamoly  Committee recommended that they are performing  the same  duties on  par  with  the  Medical Officers. Therefore,  the High  Court ought  to have granted them the  scale of pay from 1986. As stated earlier, reasons given in  the counter-affidavit  may not  be correct reasons but the  Anamoly Committee  had recommended  for payment  of same scale of pay to the persons like the petitioners w.e.f. November 7,  1994. It is well settled law that fixing a date is not  arbitrary violating  Article 14.  It is  settled law

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 2  

that the authorities cannot pick up from their hat and fix a date. The  question,  therefore,  arises  for  decision  is: whether the  date  fixed  is  arbitrary?  The  question  was referred to  the Anamoly  Committee to advise the Government as to the fixation of the scale of pay to which persons like the petitioners would be entitled to. The Committee had gone into the  question and  recommended  the  scale  of  pay  of Rs.2200-4000/- to  the persons like the petitioners and also recommended to  give effect  from the date on which they had decided, namely  November 7,  1994.  The  Government  having accepted the  same and  given effect  from the  date.  Under those circumstances, it cannot be said that fixation of date is arbitrary violating Article 14.      The special leave petition is accordingly dismissed.