Civil Writ Petition No. 234 of 1994 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No. 234 of 1994 Date of decision:- 08.09.2011 Om Parkash Kapil ...Petitioner Versus State of Punjab and others ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE RITU BAHRI Present:- None for the petitioner. Mr. P.C. Goyal, Addl.A.G. Punjab. RITU BAHRI J.(Oral) The petitioner is seeking writ of certiorari quashing the order dated 21.12.1992 (Annexure P-5) vide which he has been denied to exercise his option for fixing his pay @ Rs.400/- on 01.06.1979 instead of 31.3.1980 in the pay scale of Rs.250-25-600. The petitioner was appointed as Social Studies Master in the pay scale of Rs.220-500. He was granted two advanced increments in view of State Government letter dated 23.7.1957 on 10.7.1989, when he was working as Lecturer. This benefit was granted to him in compliance of the order passed in Writ Petition No.9522 of 1987. The petitioner was appointed as Master on 25.3.1972 and due to higher qualification of M.A. on the date of his appointment, he was granted two advanced increments in the pay- scale of Rs.220-500. This benefit was granted to the petitioner when he was working as Lecturer in the grade of Rs.250-600. As per the Civil Writ Petition No. 234 of 1994 -2- judgment dated 02.8.1988 passed in CWP No.9520 of 1987 (Annexure P-1) as per option exercised by the petitioner, his pay was fixed to Rs.400/- on 1.3.1980 in the revised pay scales. The petitioner vide letter dated 30.11.1992 (Annexure P-4) sought the permission to change his option, which was rejected vide order dated 04.02.1993 (Annexure P-5). The permission to change of option was declined by the District Education Officer, Ludhiana. In the written statement, reference has been made to the Rule 5 sub Clause 1 to 4 (Annexure R-1) stating that the option once exercised shall be final. The petitioner has tried to seek the benefit of instructions (Annexure P-2) dated 1.3.1988, which are not applicable to the case of the petitioner as neither he was given any selection grade or enhanced pay scale on promotion retrospectively. The benefit of these instructions can be availed by an employee, who was granted selection grade or enhanced scale of pay on promotion retrospectively after 21.1.1982. The petitioner was granted the benefit of two advanced increments at the time of appointment. He has not been granted any selection grade retrospectively between the period 01.1.1978 to 31.3.1980. The petitioner was initially appointed in the grade of 220-500 on which he was granted two increments of having higher qualification of M.A., M.Sc., and M.Ed. Subsequently, he was promoted as Lecturer on 20.6.1975, therefore, he was not granted any selection grade enable him to exercise fresh option as per Annexure P-2. In view of the stand taken in the written statement, the writ petition is dismissed. September 08, 2011 ( RITU BAHRI ) Vijay Asija JUDGE