CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.5319 OF 2007 :{ 1 }: IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH DATE OF DECISION: JANUARY 10 ,2011 Shakuntala Wadhwa and others .....Petitioners VERSUS State of Haryana and others ....Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RANJIT SINGH 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgement? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? PRESENT: Mr. R.K. Malik, Sr.Advocate with Mr. Vishal Malik, Advocate, for the petitioners. Ms. Sharuti Jain, AAG, Haryana, for the State. Mr. Ashok Aggarwal, Sr.Advocate with Mr. Deepak Thapar, Advocate, for respondent No.3. **** RANJIT SINGH, J. (ORAL) The petitioners were appointed as Teachers on regular basis in Mata Har Kaur Girls High School, Model Town, Panipat on different dates. They have now approached this Court with a grievance that the management, despite having given an undertaking that they would pay them the salary at par as available for an aided post, is now backing out from said undertaking after getting the school declared to be unaided. At the outset, learned senior counsel for the petitioners CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.5319 OF 2007 :{ 2 }: was asked to satisfy this Court whether the writ petition would be maintainable or not. The same issue was put to counsel for the petitioners on 1.7.2010. Learned counsel instead points out that the facts in this case reveals violation of Article 21 of the Constitution of India and in support has made reference to Jarnail Singh, Science Master and others Vs. Khalsa High School, Ambala City and others, 2005 (3) PLR 438. No doubt, in this case the Division Bench of this Court had issued direction to the respondent-School for making payment of salary to the Teachers on the ground that its non- payment led to infringement of Article 21 of the Constitution but the Court at the same time had also observed that when the school is no longer an aided school, the management of school would not fall within the definition of `State'. If that is the position, it would not be appropriate to invoke the writ jurisdiction to issue any direction. Mr.Malik, however, submits that because of undertaking, the respondents are required to pay salary as payable on an aided post, which is seriously disputed by Mr.Aggarwal, who says that the petitioners would be entitled to payment of salary as per the Haryana School Education Rules, 2003. Since the writ petition is not maintainable, the petitioners may avail their alternative remedy for settling their claim in regard to payment of salary. Relegated to the alternative remedy available to the petitioners. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. January 10 ,2011 (RANJIT SINGH ) khurmi JUDGE