IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP No.3923 of 2009 Date of decision : 06.04.2011 Jaipal … Petitioner Versus State of Punjab and others …Respondents CORAM : HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE PERMOD KOHLI Present: Mr.Sandeep Punchhi, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr.B.S.Chahal, DAG, Punjab. Permod Kohli, J. The petitioner applied for appointment as lecturer in English pursuant to the advertisement issued by the Punjab Public Service Commission, Patiala. On completion of the process of selection, petitioner came to be appointed in the year 1999. He was confirmed on 13.10.1991 (Annexure P-2) after completing the probation period. The petitioner has acquired Post-graduate Diploma in teaching of English in the year 1986 as is evident from Annexure P-1. On the basis of the aforesaid qualification, petitioner claimed an extra increment. The claim of the petitioner has been rejected vide impugned order dated 03.10.2008 (Annexure P-6) on the only ground that the petitioner was not having M.Phil Degree at the time of his appointment. In the written statement, respondents have categorically admitted that the diploma possessed by the petitioner is equivalent to M.Phil Degree in terms of UGC DO No.F1-690 (ASC) dated September, 1993. Under these circumstances, the rejection of the claim of the petitioner and denying the benefit of one yearly advance increment is not justified. CWP No.3923 of 2009 [2] In the above circumstances, this petition is allowed and the impugned order 03.10.2008 (Annexure P-6) is hereby quashed and respondents are directed to grant one yearly increment to the petitioner on the basis of the above qualification with effect from the date it is due to the petitioner under the rules. Let the amount be calculated and paid within a period of three months. ( Permod Kohli ) Judge 06.04.2011 sd