Junior Can't Draw Higher Pay Than Senior Under 2022 Civil Service Rules; Recovery Barred If Excess Due To Departmental Error: HP High Court
The Himachal Pradesh High Court has held that, as per the Himachal Pradesh Civil Services (Revised Pay) Rules, 2022, a government employee's pay can't exceed that of their immediate senior.
However, the Court quashed the recovery of excess salary paid to the petitioner, as the excess payment made occurred due to a departmental error.
Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua remarked that: “Admittedly, a Clerk is 'placed' as Junior Assistant and not 'promoted' as such. This error, having come to the notice of the competent authority upon being pointed out by respondent No.4, has justly been ordered to be rectified.”
Further, the Court reiterated that: “Clause 4(II)… clearly stipulates that there cannot be any situation, where as a consequence of exercise of option under the said instructions, a junior can draw higher pay than that of his immediate senior. If he does, his pay would be refixed and brought down to the level of his immediate senior.”
The petitioner Chaman filed a writ petition before the High Court, challenging the order of the Food and Civil Supplies Department through which his pay was revised and was made at par with his immediate senior and even ordered recovery of excess payment allegedly made due to incorrect pay fixation.
Both the petitioner and his senior, respondent No.4, were appointed as Clerks on a contractual basis in 2011 and were regularised after five years of service and were later placed as Junior Assistants in October 2021.
In 2022, the Himachal Pradesh Civil Services (Revised Pay) Rules, 2022 came into effect.
After which, the respondent No.4 found out that instead of being senior, his pay was less than the petitioner, and he thereafter filed a representation, which led to the impugned order and directed recovery.
The petitioner contended that, according to Rule 9 of the Revised Pay Rules, 2022 instead of reducing his pay, respondent no.4's pay should be increased.
In response, the Deputy Controller (Finance & Accounts) submitted that explained that the petitioner's option for pay fixation was incorrect, as the placement as Junior Assistant was not a “promotion” within the meaning of the 2022 rules.
Case Name: Chaman v/s State of H.P. and ors.
Case No.: CWP No. 3646 of 2024
Date of Decision: 14.10.2025
For the Petitioner: Mr. Rajender Singh, Advocate
For the Respondent: Mr. Y.P.S., Additional Advocate General, for respondents No.1 to 3. Mr. Rohit, Dy. Controller (F&A), Food Civil Supplies Department, present in person.