IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. LPA No. 175 of 2009. Decided on: July 1, 2011. State of H.P. & ors. Vrs. Rajesh Kumar. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Kurian Joseph, Chief Justice The Hon’ble Mr. Justice V.K. Sharma, Judge. For the appellants: Mr. R.K. Bawa, AG with Mr. J.K. Verma, Dy. AG.. For the Respondent: Mr. Ranjan Sharma, Advocate. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Justice Kurian Joseph, C.J. (Oral) It is seen that an identical issue was considered by this Court leading to judgment in LPA No. 107 of 2009, titled as State of H.P. & ors. versus Mohinder Singh, decided on 30.3.2010. The text of the judgment reads as follows: “State in the education department is aggrieved by the judgment dated 23.3.2009 passed in CWP (T) No.2903/2008. The simple issue pertains to the scale of pay as applicable to the writ petitioner. Writ petitioner was initially appointed on tenure basis in the year 1981. The standard form of tenure appointment is available at Annexure A-1. It is stated that the appointment is in the pay scale of Rs.570-1080 with five increments for Shastris. The Recruitment & Promotion Rules were introduced to the department as per Annexure A-2, notification dated 23.3.1989. As per the said Rule, Shastris- Language teachers who were in the scale of Rs.570-1080 were put on revised scale of Rs.1640- 2925/-. The fixation is contained in the foot note which reads as follows: “These scales will be a measure personal to the present incumbents and in future Masters (TGT) be appointed as Language Master.” According to the government, the scale of Rs.1640- 2925/-, as per the amended Rules, will be applicable only to regular teachers and to that effect, a clarification has been issued by the government on 17.12.1991. It is stated in the said Annexure RA- 1/T, communication that teachers who did not possess B.Ed qualification would be given scale of Rs.1500-2640. It is also clarified therein itself that “Shastris/Language Teachers having B.Ed qualification shall be entitled to the pay scale in accordance with the Finance Department notification No. Fin (C) B(7)-6/88 dated 23.3.1989 ( Annexure A-2 ). According to the learned counsel appearing for the writ petitioner, despite such a clarification in the year 1991, 2 department itself had clarified in 1992 as per Annexure A-3/A that Shastris were entitled to the scale of Rs. 1640-2925/- whether they possess the B.Ed or not, in case they have been appointed prior to the introduction of the amendment on 23.3.1989. Despite the persuasive arguments made by learned Sr. Addl. Advocate General, we are unable to make out any difference in the order dated 23.3.1989, limiting its operation only to teachers appointed on regular basis. There is no dispute that the petitioner and similarly situated teachers who were Shastris have been appointed in the scale of Rs.570- 1080. It is that scale that was revised to Rs.1640-2925, wherein it had been made clear that the revision is a personal measure available to the incumbents existed as on that date and that future appointments should be limited to masters (TGT). Therefore, the original order having not made any difference between the teachers appointed on tenure basis or on regular basis and in the said order, relevant factor being only the scale of pay and since the benefit of revision of scale of pay having been extended and in a sense limited to the existing incumbents as on 23.3.1989, we are unable to be persuaded in terms of clarification Annexure RA-1/T dated 17.12.1991. Therefore, we are of the view that the judgment of the learned Single Judge does not suffer from any legal infirmity. The appeal is hence dismissed.” 2. Therefore, the judgment of the learned Single Judge is upheld and the present appeal is dismissed. However, it is made clear that in case the benefits have not been disbursed only on account of the pendency of the LPA, now that the LPA is dismissed, the due and admissible benefits will be disbursed to him within a period of one month from the date of production of the copy of this judgment. (Justice Kurian Joseph), Chief Justice. July 1, 2011. ( Justice V.K. Sharma), (karan/vs) Judge.