Punjab & Haryana High Court Quashes Pay Re-Fixation and Recovery; Holds Promotee SDE Entitled to Same Higher Pay Scales as Direct Recruits

Case Name: Sunil Kumar Garg vs. State of Haryana and Others
Date of Judgment: 02 December 2025
Citation: CWP-541-2005
Bench: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Moudgil

Held: The Punjab and Haryana High Court struck down the State’s decision to re-fix the petitioner’s pay in a lower scale and order recovery of alleged excess payments, holding that promotee Sub Divisional Engineers are entitled to the same higher pay scales as direct recruits. The Court held that the State’s action violated Articles 14 and 16, ignored binding precedent, and impermissibly withdrew long-granted financial benefits without notice.

Summary: The petitioner joined service as a Section Officer in 1977 and rose to the post of SDE on adhoc basis in 1990. He was granted higher time-bound scales under the State’s 1989 policy after completing the required years of service. Despite this, the department later issued an order reducing his scale to ₹8000-13500 and directing recovery, asserting that higher scales were meant only for direct-recruit SDEs.

The Court found this distinction wholly arbitrary and unsupported by law. It relied on earlier judgments, including Kamlesh Kumar Bindal, Suraj Bhan, Randhir Singh, Bhagwan Dass, and Kamlakar, which hold that once employees function in a unified cadre and perform identical duties, they cannot be denied equal pay merely because their entry route differed. The State’s attempt to deny higher scales to promotees after a decade was held to be unconstitutional and contrary to the doctrine of legitimate expectation. Further, in the absence of fraud or misrepresentation, any recovery was barred under Rafiq Masih.

The Court also criticised the State for withdrawing vested benefits without notice and for acting contrary to its own policy, observing that an employee’s source of recruitment becomes irrelevant once he is integrated into a common cadre and performs the same duties as others receiving the higher scale.

Decision: The writ petition was allowed. The impugned order dated 03 December 2004 was quashed, the higher scales already granted to the petitioner were ordered to continue, and any recovery made or proposed was directed to be refunded within eight weeks.