( 2025:HHC:25670 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. CWPOA No.7868 of 2019 along-with connected matters Decided on: 31st July, 2025 CWPOA No.7868 of 2019 Vinod Kumar Sharma .......Petitioner versus State of H.P. and others ...Respondents CWPOA No.7869 of 2019 Satya Kumari .......Petitioner versus State of H.P. and others ...Respondents CWPOA No.7865 of 2019 Anil Kumar Sharma .......Petitioner versus State of H.P. and others ...Respondents CWPOA No.7816 of 2019 Mangat Ram .......Petitioner versus State of H.P. and others ...Respondents CWPOA No.7811 of 2019 Harish Kumar Gupta .......Petitioner ( 2025:HHC:25670 ) 2 versus State of H.P. and others ...Respondents Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Satyen Vaidya, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the petitioner(s): Mr. Hamender Singh Chandel, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr.Seema Sharma, Deputy Advocate General. Satyen Vaidya, Judge(Oral) All these petitions involve identical questions of facts and law and thus are being disposed of by a common order. 2. All the petitioners have retired from the post of Registrar, Department of Forest, Government of Himachal Pradesh. The common grievance of the petitioners is that their pay-scale has been brought at par with the pay-scale applicable to the post of Superintendent Grade-I, which is the feeder category post for the promotional post of Registrar in the Department. 3. The petitioners have exemplified the difference in the pay-scale of the post of Registrar and that of the Superintendent Grade-I right from 01.01.1978 till 01.01.2006 in the tabulated form as under:- 1 Whether the reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes. ( 2025:HHC:25670 ) 3 Name of category Pay scale granted w.e.f. 1.1.1978 1.1.1986 1.1.1996 1.1.2006 Registrar 1200- 1700 2410- 4000 7880- 11660 10300- 34800+GP5400 Supdt. Gr.I 825-1580 2200- 4000 7220- 11660 10300- 34800+5000 4. Thus, it is demonstrated that the pay-scales applicable to the post of Registrar and Superintendent Grade- I were different and in fact the pay-scale of Registrar was always higher than the pay-scale available to the post of Superintendent Grade-I. 5. It is also not in dispute that the post of Superintendent Grade-I is feeder category post for the promotional post of Registrar, as per Recruitment and Promotion Rules. 6. By virtue of the enforcement of H.P. Civil Services (Category/Post wise Revised Pay) Rules, 2012, the pay-scale of the category of Superintendent Grade-I for Forest Department was revised to Rs.15600-39100+5400 G.P., whereas, no revision of pay was granted to the category of Registrars. In this manner, the category of Superintendent Grade-I in Forest Department were granted higher pay than the promotional post of Registrar which remained at the scale of Rs.10300-34800+5400 G.P. ( 2025:HHC:25670 ) 4 7. The petitioners represented against the injustice meted out to them and as a result, the respondents granted the same pay-scale to the post of Registrars in Forest Department, which was granted to the category of Superintendent Grade-I, in pursuance to the 2012 pay revision Rules. 8. The respondents have contested the claim of petitioners primarily on the ground that 2012 pay revision Rules have superseded the previous Rules. It is also the case of the respondents that after the enforcement of 2012 revised pay Rules, it was proposed to grant the pay structure of Rs.15600-39100+5400 G.P. to the post which was higher in hierarchy to the post of Superintendent Grade-I or Section Officer because by doing so, there would be no financial burden on the State exchequer. 9. From the stand so taken by the respondents, one thing is clear that no exercise appears to have been undertaken in order to remove the anomaly that has crept in by equating the pay-scale of feeder and promotional post. It is more than settled that the feeder and promotional post cannot have the same pay-scale. It being so, the case of the petitioners is required to be considered by respondents No.1 ( 2025:HHC:25670 ) 5 and 2 in above context and to take a final decision thereafter, more particularly, when the case of the petitioners had already been recommended by the Administrative Department vide communication dated 23.05.2016 from the Principal, Chief Conservator of Forests, Himachal Pradesh to the Additional Chief Secretary (Forest) to the Government of Himachal Pradesh and no decision is stated to have been taken on such recommendation till date. 10. Accordingly, all the writ petitions are disposed of with direction to respondents No.1 and 2 to consider the case of the petitioners with a view to remove the anomaly which has been created by placing the feeder category of Superintendent Grade-I and promotional post of Registrar in Forest Department in the same pay-scale w.e.f. 01.12.2013. The entire exercise shall be completed within two months in terms of this judgment. 16. The petitions are disposed of in the aforesaid terms, so also the pending applications, if any. July 31, 2025 ( Satyen Vaidya ) (naveen) Judge