IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. CWP(T) No.: 7371 of 2008. Decided on: 01.12.2010. __________________________________________________________ Prakash Chand. … Petitioner. Versus State of Himachal Pradesh and another. … Respondents. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajiv Sharma, J. Whether approved for reporting?1 No. For the Petitioner : None. For the Respondents : Mr. P.M. Negi, Deputy Advocate General with Mr. R.P. Singh, Assistant Advocate General. Rajiv Sharma, J. (oral): Petitioner was appointed as untrained J.B.T. Teacher on 23rd June, 1966 in the respondent-department. He appeared in the J.B.T. Teacher examination in the month of October, 1966. He got “re-appear”. Since he had worked for more than five years, he applied for award of special certificate as per Annexure P-2, dated 9.2.1973. He has also placed on record copy of experience certificate vide Annexue P-4. 2. The case of the petitioner, in a nutshell, is that though he has put in 24 years of regular service, he has neither been awarded special certificate to which he was entitled as per Annexure P-2 nor has he been given increments. The case of the respondent-State, in a nutshell, is that since the petitioner had been appointed as untrained J.B.T. Teacher, he is not entitled to regular pay-scale. It is averred in the reply that the petitioner himself has not applied for the award of special certificate. The Court is of the 1 Whether the reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? No. - 2 - considered view that the petitioner ought to have been awarded special certificate as per Annexure P-2, dated 9th February, 1973. He has been issued experience certificate by the Headmaster of the Government Middle School where he was teaching. He had worked for more than 24 years at the time of filing this petition. The experience gained by the petitioner of 24 years is itself a qualification. There is no complaint against the duties discharged by the petitioner. He has been issued experience certificate by the Headmaster vide Annexure P-4 and his case was required to be considered for award of special certificate since he had worked for more than 5 years continuously after his appointment on 23.6.1966. He was also entitled to the benefits under Assured Career Progression Scheme after completion of 8, 16 and 24 years service. The action of the respondents of neither granting the petitioner special certificate nor placing him in regular pay-scale is arbitrary. The respondent-State is a Welfare State and cannot exploit the persons like petitioner. 3. Accordingly, the petition is allowed. Respondents are directed to consider the case of the petitioner for award of special certificate as per Annexure P-2, dated 9th February, 1973 and also to place him in regular pay- scale with all consequential benefits including the benefits accruing to him under the Assured Career Progression Scheme. The period, the petitioner has worked with the respondent-department as teacher shall be considered as qualifying service for pensionary/retiral benefits. Needful be done within a period of eight weeks after production of certified copy of this judgment. The pending application(s), if any also stands disposed of. No costs. (Rajiv Sharma), Judge. December 01, 2010. (sck).