Rohtash Kumar & ORS v. State Of Haryana & ORS
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH **** CWP-19902-2013 (O&M) Date of Decision: 16.09.2025 ROHTASH KUMAR & ORS.
...Petitioners
Vs.
STATE OF HARYANA & ORS.
...Respondents
CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAGMOHAN BANSAL Present:- Mr. Ramnish Puri, Advocate for the petitioners Mr. Ravi Partap Singh, DAG Haryana *** JAGMOHAN BANSAL, J. (ORAL) 1.
The petitioners through instant petition under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India are seeking direction to respondent to grant them pay scale at par with drivers of other departments of State Government.
2.
The petitioners are holding rank of Constable-Driver. They have been appointed as per Punjab Police Rules, 1934 (as applicable to State of Haryana). They are claiming that they should be paid salary at par with drivers of other departments.
3.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioners are getting many allowances being members of police force, however, they are not paid salary at par with drivers of other departments. The discrimination is writ large.
4.
Learned State counsel submits that petitioners are paid multiple allowances and they are also paid one month salary over and above their 12 months' salary. They are entitled to ration money, DEEPAK BISSYAN 2025.09.16 16:57 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
CWP-19902-2013 (O&M) -2concessional travelling in Haryana Roadways buses, conveyance allowance, kit maintenance allowance, hardship allowance, summer and winter uniforms.
5.
I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case.
6.
From the perusal of record, it is evident that petitioners are part of police force. They are getting all allowances and benefits which are payable to police officials. They are getting multiple allowances which are not payable to drivers of other departments. Every year they are getting one month extra salary. Their mode of selection, responsibilities, nature of job, qualifications etc. are different from drivers of other departments. They cannot compare themselves with drivers of other departments. This Court cannot ask the State Government to make their salary at par with drivers of other departments. Determination of salary is prerogative of State Government. In the absence of manifest discrimination, this Court cannot entertain writ petition seeking pay parity with employees of other departments.
7.
In the wake of above factual position, this Court is of the considered opinion that the instant petition deserves to be dismissed and accordingly dismissed.
8.
Pending application(s), if any, stands disposed of. (JAGMOHAN BANSAL) JUDGE 16.09.2025 Deepak DPA Whether Speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No DEEPAK BISSYAN 2025.09.16 16:57 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document