RANA RIFAT SAEED (MEMBER)---The appellant, Muhammad Yasin, had been aggrieved by the wrong fixation of his pay and allowances on his promotion as Superintendent (B-16) with effect from 28-6-1990, because as Assistant Incharge he had been drawing pay and allowances in B-15 plus special allowance- of Rs.100 per month which had later been converted into Special Pay with effect from 13-2-1991. The contention of the appellant was that while fixing his pay in B-16 on promotion as Superintendent with effect from 28-6-1990, he had been deprived of by not taking into account Special Allowance/Special Pay of Rs.100, as otherwise he would have drawn additional benefit of one more increment in next higher pay scale.
2. The representatives of the Finance and the Establishment Divisions had pleaded at the Bar that the appellant was not entitled to fixation of his pay by taking into account Rs.100 which was a special allowance and converted into special pay w.e.f. 13-2-1991 i.e. Much later than his promotion as Superintendent which had taken with effect from 28-6-1990 Therefore, there was no justification that his pay should have been fixed as Superintendent w.e.f. 28-6-1990 by adding Rs.100 special allowance. However, the representatives had clarified that the Finance Division, as a matter of generous situation, had taken into account this hardship/anomaly and were of the view that the benefits should be given to such employees i.e. The Assistants Incharge and their special allowance/special pay of Rs. 100 should be added, while fixing their salaries on promotion to the posts of Superintendent with effect from 1-6-1991. Since the appellant had been promoted earlier with effect from 28-6-1990, when he had been drawing special allowance, he could not be given this benefit with effect from 28-6-1990.
3. We have heard both the parties and assessed that had the appellant been, promoted with effect from 13-2-1991, he should have drawn the benefit of fixation of his pay by adding Rs.100 which had by then been converted into pay. The Establishment/Finance Divisions, while fixing his pay should not have ignored this important aspect, which had brought him the financial hardship and better refixed his pay etc. With effect from 13-2-1991 and given him proper benefits. Both the representatives of the Finance and Establishment Divisions could not give a satisfactory answer that why the appellant's pay should have not been fixed by adding Rs.100 by deferring such fixation of pay and allowances and by giving him the benefit with effect from 13-2-1991, if not earlier. To resolve the issue, the representatives of the Finance and Establishment Divisions have agreed at Bar for such fixation of pay with effect from 1-6-1991 and not with effect from 13-2-1991, and the appellant is also in agreement with this offer/contention of the respondent divisions since the parties have mutually agreed for said reliefs with effect from 1-6-1991, the appeal is disposed of in these terms.
4. No order as to costs.