Ram Chander v. State Of Haryana
-1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ***** CWP No.14248 of 1997 (O & M) Date of Decision : 20.2.2024 Ram Chander and others ..... Petitioners versus The State of Haryana and others ..... Respondents
2. CWP No.12197 of 1998 Raj Singh and others ..... Petitioners versus The State of Haryana and others ..... Respondents
3. CWP No.4906 of 1999 Jagdish Lal Arora and others ..... Petitioners versus State of Haryana and others ..... Respondents
4. CWP No.6024 of 2000 Nathi Ram and oithers ..... Petitioners versus The State of Haryana and others ..... Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TRIBHUVAN DAHIYA Present: Mr. Ravi Verma, Advocate (in CWP-14248-1997 and CWP-12197-1998) Mr. Subhash Ahuja, Advocate (in CWP-4906-1999) Mr. Anand Bhardwaj, Advocate (in CWP-6024-2000) For the petitioners Ms. Tanushree Gupta, DAG, Haryana ---
-2TRIBHUVAN DAHIYA J. (ORAL): Since a common issue arises for adjudication in all these petitions, the same are being decided together. Facts are, however, taken from CWP No.14248 of 1997.
2.
The petition has been filed, inter alia, seeking a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to grant higher standard pay scale of ₹1640-2900 to the petitioners w.e.f. 1.4.1995, on completion of twenty years of service.
2.1.
Learned counsel for the petitioners contend that the Department revised/modified higher standard pay scales vide letter dated 9.5.1995, Annexure P-3, among others, category no.14 which related to the promotional post of Masters and Head Teachers. However, the petitioners, who were working as JBT teachers, were discriminated against as the scales qua them, category 10, were not revised. He further contends that during pendency of the petition, a memo dated 10.3.1999, Annexure P-6, giving clarification regarding grant of higher standard pay scales was issued. It stipulated that selection of first and second higher standard pay scales is to be made keeping in view the functional pay scale as on 1.1.
1986 of the post on which the concerned government employee was working on completion of ten or twenty years of regular satisfactory service on or after 1.1.1994. And where the post did not exist on 1.1.1986, the functional pay scale will be the same as sanctioned at the time of creation and upgradation of the post first time after 1.1.1986. He further contends that the petitioners were promoted as Head Teacher from 1998 onwards, and were entitled to benefit of revised higher standard pay scales in terms of the memo dated 10.3.1999.
-3respondents are directed to consider and decide their case for grant of modified/revised scales in terms thereof.
3.
Learned State counsel contends that the petitioners' case for grant of modified pay scales will be accordingly decided in terms of memo dated 10.3.1999, within a period of three months from the date of receiving a certified copy of this order.
4.
In view of the statement made by learned State counsel, learned counsel for the petitioners have no objection to all the petitions being disposed of in terms thereof.
5.
Ordered accordingly.
6.
In case the benefit is found due to the petitioners, the same shall be released to them within a period of four weeks thereafter. 7.
Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, stands disposed of accordingly.
8.
Photocopy of this order be placed on the connected case files. (TRIBHUVAN DAHIYA) JUDGE 20.2.2024 Ashwani