IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. CWP(T) No.: 8316 of 2008. Decided on: 24.12.2010. __________________________________________________________ Rameshwar Singh Chandel. … 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 : Mr. Dilip Sharma, Advocate. For the Respondents : Mr. P.M. Negi, Deputy Advocate General. Rajiv Sharma, J. (oral): Petitioner was appointed as Lecturer in the subject of Civil Engineering on 31.12.1991. One Meena Guleria was appointed as Lecturer in the subject of Architecture on 23rd April, 1992. Though Meena Guleria is junior to the petitioner, however, she was drawing higher salary than the petitioner. The case of the respondent-State, in a nutshell, is that the posts held by the petitioner and Meena Guleria are not identical. The petitioner and Meena Guleria have been appointed as Lecturers; petitioner has been appointed in the subject of Civil Engineering and Meena Guleria has been appointed in the subject of Architecture. There is no difference in the posts held by the petitioner and Meena Guleria. Since, admittedly, the petitioner is senior to Meena 1 Whether the reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? No. - 2 - Guleria, his salary could not be lesser than Meena Guleria. Their Lordships of Hon’ble Supreme Court in Er. Gurcharan Singh Grewal and Anr. Versus Punjab State Electricity Board and others, (2009) 3 SCC, 94 have held that the junior person cannot draw higher salary than the senior. 2. Accordingly, the petition is allowed. The respondents are directed to consider the case of the petitioner for higher salary/stepping up within a period of one month after the production of certified copy of the judgment by the petitioner. The pending application(s), if any, also stands disposed of. No costs. (Rajiv Sharma), Judge. December 24, 2010. (sck).