2026:HHC:19748 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWPOA No.3703 of 2019 and CWPOA No.3336 of 2019 Reserved on: 07.04.2026 Decided on: 25.05.2026 ____________________________________________________________ 1. CWPOA No.3703 of 2019 B.R. Thakur ...Petitioner Versus H.P. State Electricity Board ...Respondent _____________________________________________________________ 2. CWPOA No.3336 of 2019 B.R. Thakur ...Petitioner Versus H.P. State Electricity Board Ltd. ...Respondent _____________________________________________________________ Coram Hon'ble Mr. Justice Jiya Lal Bhardwaj, Judge Whether approved for reporting? 1 For the petitioner(s): Mr. Sunil Mohan Goel, Senior Advocate, with Mr. Paras Dhaulta, Advocate. For the respondent(s): Mr. Ravinder Thakur, Advocate. Jiya Lal Bhardwaj, Judge Both the abovementioned petitions are taken up together since the relief claimed in the petitions is with respect of grant of Time Bound Promotional/Devised Promotional Scale(s) on completion of 9/16 years’ service, respectively. 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 2026:HHC:19748 2. In CWPOA No.3703 of 2019, the petitioner has prayed for quashing of order dated 23.09.2005, passed by the respondent-Board, whereby his claim for grant of Time Bound Promotional/Devised Promotional Scale on completion of 9 years’ service has been denied and in CWPOA No.3703 of 2019, he has prayed for grant of Time Bound Promotional/Devised Promotional Scale on completion of 16 years’ service. 3. For deciding the dispute, the facts mentioned in CWPOA No.3703 of 2019 are taken and the relief claimed in this petition is reproduced hereunder: “i) That the impugned Annexure:A-22, dated 23.9.2005 may be quashed and set aside; ii) That the respondent Board may be directed to implement letter dated 1.7.2004 i.e. Annexure:A-19 in its entirety and to grant the applicant the Time Bound Promotional/Devised Promotional Scale on completion of 9 years’ service; iii) That the respondent Board may be directed to release the First Time Bound Promotional/Devised Promotional Scale of Rs.7750-13300 to the applicant w.e.f. 19.2.2003 and to pay arrears thereof alongwith interest @18% per annum;” 4. Shorn of unnecessary details, the key facts of the case are that the petitioner was promoted as Divisional Accountant (in short ‘DA’) which post was subsequently re-designated as Superintendent (D/ACS), 3 2026:HHC:19748 vide office order dated 07.01.1994, in the pay scale of ₹1880-3300/- (Master scale of ₹750-6700/-), on which post he joined his duties on 19.02.1994. The respondent- Board had introduced a scheme, vide office order dated 31.01.1991 applicable w.e.f. 01.01.1986, for granting Time Bound Promotional Scales on completion of 9/16 years’ service, which were also made applicable to the category of DA w.e.f. 01.01.1986. As per office order dated 30.05.1994, the master pay scale of ₹750-6700 was revised to ₹770-6700 w.e.f. 01.11.1993 and pay scale of DAs was increased from ₹1880-3300/- to ₹1900-3300/- without obtaining option. The pay scale of the petitioner was fixed in the revised master pay scale of ₹1900-3300/- vide office order dated 20.08.1994, without obtaining option from him. The petitioner immediately made a representation to retain the old master/pay scale of ₹1880-3300/- and the pay fixed earlier vide order dated 20.08.1994 was re-fixed vide order dated 28.10.1994 in the pay scale of ₹1880-3300/-(Annexure A-4). Thereafter, vide office order dated 05.01.1995 (Annexure A-5), the pay scale of ₹1880-3300/- was revised w.e.f. 01.01.1986 to ₹2000-3500/-. Though the pay scale of the petitioner 4 2026:HHC:19748 was revised from ₹1880-3300 to ₹2000-3500/-, but the competent authority of the respondent-Board had issued another order dated 27.01.1995 (Annexure A-6), whereby pay scale of the petitioner, which was already fixed, was directed to remain unchanged i.e. in the pay scale of ₹1880-3300/-. Thereafter, vide office order dated 04.12.1996 (Annexure A-7), it was ordered that the respondent-Board allowed an opportunity of option to the incumbents of the category of DA [designated as Superintendent (DA)], either to retain two pay scales i.e. ₹1880-3300/- or ₹2000-3500/- respectively or to opt the improved pay ₹2100-3700 and ₹2000-3500/- w.e.f. 01.01.1996. Further the DA, who will opt to retain the pay scale of ₹2000-3500/- with start of ₹2100/- and ₹1880- 3300/- w.e.f. 01.01.1996 shall be eligible for grant of Time Bound Promotional/Devised Scale(s) on completion of 9/16 years of service in accordance with earlier Order No.30, dated 20.05.1992. 5. It has been averred that the petitioner had never opted to the revised pay scale of ₹2000-3500/-, nor any option was sought from him, though he was working in the office of Accounts Officer (Admn.). The respondent- 5 2026:HHC:19748 Board had issued a letter dated 16.05.2000, under the subject ‘Grant of Promotional/Devised Promotional Scales to the employees of the Board beyond 22.05.1998. Thereafter, the respondent-Board had made regulations to amend the Himachal Pradesh State Electricity Board (Revised Pay) Regulations, 1998. Consequent upon the revision of pay scales w.e.f. 01.01.1996, the pay scale of ₹1880-3300/- was revised to ₹6750-11050/-, vide office order dated 01.10.2001. The petitioner had opted for revised pay scale w.e.f. 01.01.1996. Thereafter, vide office order dated 18.01.2002, the respondent-Board had been pleased to notify the category wise pay scales of various categories of officers/employees. The petitioner had completed nine years’ service as DA (now re-designated as Superintendent (D/ACS) on 18.02.2003, and became eligible for the grant of First Time Bound/Devised Promotional scale of ₹7750-13300/-, w.e.f. 19.02.2003. However, nothing was done and thereafter he made another representation dated 03.02.2004. The petitioner was informed vide communication dated 24.02.2004, that as per service book, his pay was fixed in the pay scale of ₹2000-3500/-, w.e.f. 01.01.1986, in pursuance of the 6 2026:HHC:19748 office order dated 05.01.1995 and no further option was exercised by him to retain the pay scale of ₹1880-3300/-. However, necessary clarification in the matter has already been sought from the Secretariat of respondent-Board, which is yet to be received. When no action was taken by the respondent-Board, the petitioner had filed the Original Application bearing No.2796 of 2004, praying therein to grant him the First Time Bound Promotional/Devised Promotional Scale of ₹7750-13300/-, w.e.f. 19.02.2003. The Tribunal vide order dated 29.09.2004, had directed to treat the said Original Application as a representation and the respondent-Board was directed to consider and decide the same. 6. On receipt of the order passed by the Tribunal, the respondent-Board, vide office order dated 23.09.2005, had decided the matter and rejected the claim of the petitioner. The respondent-Board while rejecting the claim of the petitioner had noticed that on revision of the pay scale of Superintendent (D/A) from ₹1880-3300/- to ₹2000-3500/-, in the year 1996, all the Superintendent (D/A) were required to give option either to remain in the lower scale of ₹1880-3300/-, with entitlement to Time 7 2026:HHC:19748 Bound Promotional/Devised Promotional Scale(s) on completion of 9/16 years’ service or to opt improved pay scale of ₹2000-3500 without benefit of Time Bound Promotional Scale on completion of 9/16 years’ service. All those who had opted specifically for lower scale were retained in the lower scale and those who did not exercise the option were deemed to have been opted for the higher scale. The petitioner continued to draw increments at the higher scale of ₹2000-3500/- till 2003 and did not object to the same. Only after completion of 9 years’ of service, the petitioner had suddenly decided to request for Time Bound Promotional/Devised Promotional Scale, which was not admissible to him and his request for being considered in lower scale is clearly an afterthought. 7. The petitioner feeling aggrieved by the said order passed by the respondent-Board, had filed the Original Application which has now been registered as the present petition. The plea raised by the petitioner in the petition is that the impugned order is non-speaking. The pay scale of DA was revised from ₹1880-3300/- to ₹2000- 3500/-, w.e.f. 01.01.1986 and there is no mention in the order dated 05.01.1995 for giving option to come over to 8 2026:HHC:19748 the pay scale of ₹2000-3500/-. It has further been averred that DA, who had opted for the improved pay scale of ₹2000-3500/-, with start of ₹2100/- and ₹1880-3300/-, w.e.f. 01.01.1986 were entitled to grant of Time Bound Promotional/Devised Promotional Scale(s) on completion of 9/16 years’ service and option once exercised was final. It was obligatory on the part of Drawing and Disbursing Officer/Head of Office to obtain option from all individuals prior to fixing the pay of individual in the revised pay scale, so that one could opt either to go to the further revised scale or retain the earlier one, but neither the option was sought from the petitioner by the Accounts Officer (Admn.), nor the pay was fixed in the further revised pay scale of ₹2000-3500/-. The petitioner was appointed as DA in the pay scale of ₹1880-3300/-. It is the duty on the part of the employer to inform each and every individual regarding the option to be exercised, and thus, the action on the part of the respondent-Board to reject the claim is pleaded to be illegal and arbitrary. 8. The respondent-Board filed reply to the petition and supported the decision taken by it. The respondent- Board did not dispute the facts regarding the appointment 9 2026:HHC:19748 of the petitioner as DA in the pay scale of ₹1880-3300/-; and granting him the revised new scale/master pay scale of ₹1900-3300/- without seeking his option; and further after his representation, he was again fixed in the old pay scale of ₹1880-3300/- vide order dated 28.10.1994 made applicable w.e.f. 20.08.1994. A plea has been taken that the petitioner had not opted for pay scale of ₹1880-3300/- in pursuance of order dated 04.12.1996 (Annexure RA-15) and not availed the improved pay scale of the pay scale of ₹1880-3300/-, and since he has failed to do the needful within the prescribed period limit, he was automatically fixed in the pay scale of ₹2000-3500/-. The contention raised by the petitioner that he may be retained in the pay scale of ₹1880-3300/- does not hold good and the order dated 23.09.2005 is perfectly legal. The claim raised by the petitioner is averred to be not maintainable. 9. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and also perused the record carefully. 10. It is not in dispute that no option was sought from the petitioner in pursuance of order dated 04.12.1996. The only plea taken by the respondent-Board is that he did not exercise any option as per the order 10 2026:HHC:19748 dated 04.12.1996 and once he has failed to do so within the prescribed period limit, he was granted the revised pay scale of ₹2000-3500/-. It is not in dispute that the master scale w.e.f. 01.01.1993 was applicable to all in the first instance with no provision of option to retain the existing master scale or to come over to the revised master scale. The petitioner when promoted as DA was fixed in the pay scale of ₹1880-3300/- which pay scale was later on revised w.e.f. 01.11.1993 and the petitioner was granted ₹2200/-+₹50/- A.P. without seeking his option. However, later on, on his request to retain the existing master scale of ₹1880-3300/-, his pay was fixed in the master pay scale of ₹1880-3300/-, vide office order dated 28.10.1994 w.e.f. 20.08.1994 when he was granted the revised master pay scale. The respondent-Board had revised category wise pay scales of its employees w.e.f. 01.01.1996 and pay scale of DA was revised from ₹1900- 3300/- to ₹6750-11050, as per office order dated 01.10.2001 and thereafter as per office order dated 15.07.2004, granted Time Bound Promotional/Devised promotional Scale to DA (first Time Bound Scale of ₹7000- 11750/- after 9 years of service and second Time Bound 11 2026:HHC:19748 Scale of ₹8550-14100/- after completion of 16 years of service). The above scale was available to only those DAs who had opted the pay scale of ₹1880-3300/- in pursuance of letter dated 04.12.1996 (Annexure RA-15). Once the petitioner was promoted as DA on the same scale of ₹1880-3300/- and when he was granted revised master scale without his request, but later on, again fixed on the same scale of ₹1880-3300/-, there was no need for seeking his option or to give option by him. The petitioner had not opted for the improved revised pay scale of ₹2000-3500/-, and once he was fixed in the old master pay scale of ₹1880-3300/-, he was entitled to First Time Bound Promotional Scale on completion of 9 years’ of service and thereafter Second Time Bound Promotional Scale after completion of 16 years’ service at par with other employees who had opted for the old pay scale of ₹1880-3300/-. 11. As already observed above, once the respondent-Board after promotion of the petitioner as DA, vide office letter dated 01.07.2004, had granted him pay scale of ₹1880-3300/- and thereafter, granted the improved pay scale of ₹2000-3500/-, without seeking any 12 2026:HHC:19748 option from him, which was later on corrected and the petitioner was fixed vide order dated 28.10.1994 in the pay scale of ₹1880-3300/-, even if he was granted the revised master pay scale without any fault on his part, he was entitled to the grant of Time Bound Promotional/Devised Promotional Scale(s) on completion of 9/16 years’ service. Once the respondent-Board has not disputed the said facts, the relief claimed by the petitioner could not have been denied to him. Further, it is settled law that the technicality should not come in the way while imparting substantial justice to an employee. It is also not in dispute that the petitioner was not given the option to retain any of the pay scale after fixing him in the pay scale of ₹1880-3300/- as per office order dated 28.10.1994. Since, the petitioner had not been given the option to retain the old pay scale after 28.10.1994, he cannot be denied the benefit of Time Bound Promotional/Devised Promotional Scale(s) on completion of 9 years of service which action is totally, illegal, arbitrary, discriminatory and unjust. Hence, the order dated 23.09.2005, passed by the respondent-Board is not sustainable in law and as such is quashed with the 13 2026:HHC:19748 directions to the respondent-Board to grant him the benefit of Time Bound Promotional/Devised Promotional Scale(s) on completion of 9/16 years of service. 12. No other points have been raised. 13. Consequently, the petitions are allowed and the order dated 23.09.2005 (Annexure A-22), passed in CWPOA No.3703 of 2019, is quashed and set aside, directing the respondent-Board to grant the petitioner the Time Bound Promotional/Devised Promotional Scale(s) on completion of 9/16 years of service. The arrears on account of the grant of Time Bound Promotional/Devised Promotional Scale(s) be released in favour of the petitioner within three months’ from today and in case the benefits are not released and paid to him within three months, the respondent-Board shall pay interest @ 6% per annum from today till actual payment. However, there shall be no orders as to cost. Pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of. 25 th May, 2026 ( Jiya Lal Bhardwaj ) (Anurag) Judge