Observing that the greatness of the High Court lies only in its courage and ability to correct its mistakes, the Madras High court negatived its order of 2008 on selection grade pay for government drivers and said they are entitled to it in the scale of Rs 4,000-100-6,000 and special grade scale of Rs 4,300-100-6,000 but not more than that.
The division bench, comprising Justices V Ramasubramaniam and T Mathivanan, stated this while dismissing a large number of petitions of drivers and said that the incorrect order had resulted in filing of several petitions, hundreds of incorrect subsequent rulings and loss of several crores of Rupees to the exchequer.
In 2008, a single Judge had directed government to grant higher selection grade and special grade benefits to drivers on petitions filed to correct perceived anomalies in their pay scale since Fifth Pay Commission.
Also Read
The bench said an illegality would not undergo a metamorphosis and become legal merely because it received the seal of approval of a court of law.
It said the drivers' demand for pay scale of Rs 5000-5500 was without any entitlement and legal right.
Though the single judge's order did not specify any particular pay scale, it paved the way for litigations and even those who retired from service long ago moved court, demanding monetary benefits on the basis of this order.
Narrating how the illegality unfolded over seven years and how the government was bleeding under the threat of contempt and coercion, the bench said they had gone through Government Orders many times to find out what scale of pay the drivers are entitled to in selection and special grades.
"We are unable to find, however lenient our approach is, that the drivers could legitimately lay a claim selection grade scale of pay of Rs 5,000-8,000 and special grade scale of pay of Rs 5,500-9,000."
Therefore, what they had claimed and got in most of the previous decisions of HC was not what they were lawfully entitled to. "Once this was clear, it would follow as a natural consequence that the drivers herein want only that illegality to be perpetrated."
The bench, which quoted a Supreme Court judgement, said that in rectifying an error, no personal inhibitions should debar the court, because no person should suffer by reason of any mistake of the court.
"The apex court focused on the elementary rule of justice that no party should suffer due to the mistake of the court," the bench said and dismissed all the appeals.
