AI Drafter 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2007 (3) TMI 791
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....as been performing its municipal functions in the New Delhi area; one of them being distribution of electricity to the consumers upon buying the same from the Electricity Supply Companies. For the said purpose, it has a electricity department. In the said department, there were posts of Meter Readers as also Shifts Incharge. The pay scale of Shifts In-charge was Rs. 220-400 and that of the Meter Readers Rs. 185-300. The post of Meter Readers was meant to be filled up by direct recruitment. 17 senior most Shift In charge, however, for certain reasons opted to become Meter Readers. As they were working in a higher scale of pay, their pay was protected. Such protection of pay was given to them by an Order dated 10.2.1982, stating: 1. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 4. Shri Prem Chand Sharma, 5. Raj Kumar Kalia (6) Sh. Prabhu Dayal, (7) Sh. Anand Kishore Aggarwal (8) Shri Jagannath Parshad (9) Sh. D.P. Malhotra (10) Sh. Bhu Dev Sharma (11) Sh. Sukh Dev Singh (12) Shri Ajaib Singh (13) Shri H.C. Chauhan (14) Shri K.S. Rawat (15) Shri Devi Sanai, (16) Shri Mansa Ram, (17) Shri Subhash Chand Sharma and if so what directions are necessary in this respect? 4. Respondents were not parties therein. They did not file any application for their impleadment. By reason of an Award dated 7.1.1998, the Industrial Court directed: In the light of the above observations of the meter readers, who were in service at the time when the benefit was given to 17 meter readers, whose names are morefully detailed in Anne....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the Respondent to grant to the petitioners the benefit of the revised pay scale, as had been granted to other meter readers vide office order dated 10.02.1982 (Annexure- B). Office order dated 23.12.1998 (Annexure-D) and office order dated 17.5.1999 (Annexure - D-1) alongwith all the consequential reliefs. b) Grant to the petitioners the appropriate amount of damages including cost of the present petition as also such other or further relief's as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit, proper and expedient in the facts and circumstances of the present case. 7. Mr. Rakesh K. Khanna, learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant would urge that once the cut off date was fixed by the Tribunal as on 6.2.1982, the res....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ot by way of a revision of scale of pay as understood in the ordinary sense of the term. Those Meter Readers who were purported to be similarly situated meaning thereby those who were in service as on 12.2.1982 i.e. the date when the purported pay scales of 17 senior most Meter Readers on ad-hoc basis were revised, raised an industrial dispute. The Industrial Tribunal in its Award proceeded on the basis that the concerned workmen were entitled to the benefit of higher scale as they were similarly situated to those 17 senior most Meter Readers. The direction in terms of the Award was confined only to those who were in employment at the time when the said benefit was given to the said 17 Meter Readers. They, thus, formed a class by themselves....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... were represented through their Union. 12. There is another aspect of the matter which cannot be lost sight of. Respondents herein filed a Writ Petition after 17 years. They did not agitate their grievances for a long time. They, as noticed herein, did not claim parity with the 17 workmen at the earliest possible opportunity. They did not implead themselves as parties even in the reference made by the State before the Industrial Tribunal. It is not their case that after 1982, those employees who were employed or who were recruited after the cut-off date have been granted the said scale of pay. After such a long time, therefore, the Writ Petitions could not have been entertained even if they are similarly situated. It is trite that the di....