DECISION This is an appeal filed by Aftab Ahmed Siddiqui against the impugned order, dated 29-11-1984, passed by the learned Sind Labour Court No.II, Karachi, rejecting the grievance petition filed under section 25-A, I.R.O. 1969.
2. The brief facts of the case are that the appellant was a Driver in the respondent Railway in N.P.S.8.
He reached the maximum of N.P.S.8 on 1-12-1975 and according to the policy moved over in N.P.S.9 on 1-12-1976 and his salary was fixed at Rs.440 instead of Rs.460. In May,1977, the pay scales were revised and on revision, the salary of the appellant was fixed at Rs.634 and, thereafter, the respondent, without assigning any reason and arbitrarily reduced his salary to Rs.612, vide letter, dated 5-2-1978. That the fixation at proper stop stage in the revised scale was to be done by allowing an increase of 10% in the basic pay plus the dearness allowance. That on 1-12-1980, the appellant had reached at Rs.700, the maximum in N.P.S.9 and hence, he was to be switched/moved over to next higher scale N.P.S.10 and be fixed at Rs.712 and thus, with an increment of this scale, i.e Rs.25, making his pay at Rs.736 be fixed with effect from 1-7-1981, but the respondent fixed at Rs.700, which would have been fixed with effect from 1-12-1979. Thus, due to the wrong fixations, the appellant caused accumulated recurring loss of Rs.130 per month in his pay and on that basis there was also recurring loss in conveyance and running allowance. As the grievance of the appellant was not redressed by the respondents, therefore, he filed a grievance petition under section 25-A, I.R.O. 1969, before the learned Labour Court on 29-12-1983.
3. The contentions of the respondents are that the pay of the appellant at the time of move-over on 1-12-1976 in N.P.S.9 was correctly fixed at Rs.440, that the pay of the appellant was wrongly fixed on 1-12-1980 and that since he did not reach the maximum of N.P.S. No. 9 at the time when the pay scales were revised on 1981, he continued in N.P.S. No.9 and there was no question of move-over to N-.P.S.10 They further contended that at the time of revision of pay scale in 1977, the appellant's pay was wrongly fixed at Rs.634 and when this error came to the notice, the same was rectified and his pay was reduced to Rs.612.
4. I have heard Mr. S.P. Lodhi, the learned representative for the appellant and Mr. Abdul Aziz, learned Advocate for the respondents and have gone through the record and proceedings of the case. Vide Railway Board Letter No. 72-PC-1/35, dated 3-7-1975, it was mentioned that where a civil servant is transferred from a lower to a higher scale, initial pay in the higher scale will be fixed at the stage next above the pay admissible in the lower scale as on the eve of the transfer to the higher scale. This rule has to be properly applied. It is, however, not to be forgotten that each year on -1st December, the appellant was entitled to an annual increment. Mere fact that the appellant jumped from scale 8 to N.P.S.9 or from N.P.S.9 to N.P.S.10. Did not mean that the appellant was to be denied his legal right of getting his usual annual increment. According to our High Court, vide, order 19-12-1979 in Constitutional Petition No. 56 of 1978, it is held that when an increment could not be granted to the applicant in Scale No. 8, his pay automatically jumped to Scale No.9 in which he was allowed an increment of Rs.20". On the same analogy I hold that the appellant is entitled to get an additional increment in N.P.S.9 at the time of his transfer from N.P.S.8 to N.P.S.9 or from N.P.S.9 to N.P.S.10, as the case may be. Revised National Scales of Pay were introduced with effect from 1-5- 1977, and after this introduction, the dearness allowance was to be merged with the pay on which 10$ increase was allowed and then the pay was to be fixed in the existing scale or in the next higher scale.
5. The upshot of the above discussion is that the pay of the appellant on 1-12-1976 on his transfer/move-over to N.P.S.9 was not correctly fixed at Rs.440, therefore, the reduction in his salary from hs.634 to Rs.612, vide letter, dated 5-2-1978 was arbitrary and illegal inasmuch as the appellant's salary has not been wrongly fixed at Rs.634 at the time of revision of pay in May, 1977.
The impugned order of the learned Labour Court is, therefore, set aside and the appeal is accordingly allowed, as prayed.