IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No.198 of 2009 Date of Decision : February 25, 2010. Amit Kumar and others .....Petitioners versus State of Punjab and others .....Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT. Present : Mr.Kunal Dawar, Advocate, for the petitioners. Ms.Charu Tuli, Sr.DAG, Punjab. Mr.Sanjeev Sharma, Advocate, for respondent No.2. -.- 1. Whether Reporters of Local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? --- Surya Kant , J. (Oral) This order shall dispose of Civil Writ Petition Nos.198 of 2009 and 11174 of 2009 as common questions of law and facts are involved in both the cases. For brevity, the facts are being extracted form Civil Writ petition No.198 of 2009. The petitioners are working as ETT Teachers, who were initially appointed by the Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan Society and thereafter were appointed on regular basis under the Zila Parisads. Their grievance is that in the years 2004-2005 while they were being paid fixed salary of Rs.5000/- per month, the respondents had actually sanctioned a sum of C.W.P.No .198 of 2009 2 RS.7200/- per month for every teacher. In support of their claim, some information received by the petitioners under the Right to Information Act, has been relied upon. Upon notice, affidavit of Sh.Krishan Kumar, IAS, State Project Director, Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan Society, Punjab, has been filed, inter-alia, pointing out that Rs.7200/- per month, per teacher, were approved in the “Annual Work Plan and Budget” for the year 2004-2005 but the actual salary sanctioned was Rs.5000/- only. The affidavit is duly supported with the official record (Annexures R-2/1 and Annexure R-2/2). In this view of the matter, while no direction can be issued to the respondents to pay enhanced salary as claimed by the petitioners for the year 2004-2005 or for the subsequent period, I deem it appropriate to dispose of these writ petitions with a direction to the respondents to consider the representation dated 21.11.2008 (Annexure P-23), said to have been submitted by the petitioners in a representative capacity, sympathetically and in accordance the Government Policy. However, this order shall not be constructed as a direction to make any additional payment to the petitioners. Ordered accordingly. Dasti. 25-02-2010 (SURYA KANT) Mohinder JUDGE