IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No.7237 of 1989 (O&M) Date of decision: 23.09.2011 Ruldu Singh, S.S.Master, Government High School, Hathan, District Sangrur, and others. ....Petitioners versus The State of Punjab, through the Secretary to Government of Punjab, Education Department, Chandigarh, and others. ....Respondents II. Civil Writ Petition No.10878 of 1989 (O&M) Megh Raj Sharma, Science Master, Government High School, Bhasaur, District Sangrur, and others. ....Petitioners versus The State of Punjab, through the Secretary to Government of Punjab, Education Department, Chandigarh, and others. ....Respondents III. Civil Writ Petition No.16597 of 1990 (O&M) Shiv Kumar Lomash, Principal, S.D.High/Senior Secondary School, Dhuri, and others. ....Petitioners versus State of Punjab, through the Secretary to Government of Punjab, Education Department, Chandigarh, and others. ....Respondents IV. Civil Writ Petition No.557 of 1991 (O&M) Satnam Singh Chahal, S.S. Master, Government High School, Bhattian, District Sangrur, and others. ....Petitioners versus State of Punjab, through the Secretary to Government of Punjab, Education Department, Chandigarh, and others. ....Respondents ---- Civil Writ Petition No.7237 of 1989 (O&M) - 2 - CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE K. KANNAN ---- Present: Mr. Raj Paul Kansal, Advocate, for the petitioners. Ms. Kavita Arora, Additional Advocate General, Punjab. ---- K.Kannan, J. 1. All the above writ petitions contain the same prayer for persons situated similarly for claiming the benefit of two increments in the scales of pay of Rs.620-1200 w.e.f. 01.01.1978 with a minimum start of Rs.660/-. The grievance of the petitioners is two- fold: (i) that the fresh incumbents, who had assumed office just before the coming into force of the increased scales, were afforded two increments, while persons, who had been appointed even earlier were afforded the same scales at the same start without granting to them the increments as were afforded to the fresh incumbents; and (ii) that the language teachers, who had qualification as Shashtris or Gianis Prabhakars or in Arts and Crafts, were provided 5 or 3 increments, although the Classical and Vernacular teachers held lower posts than the post of Masters/Mistresses and Block Primary Education Officers. 2. The State would contest the claim of the petitioners by stating that the petitioners were wrong in assuming that two advance increments were being granted to certain class of teachers, while actually the teachers in the pay scales of Rs.620-1200 were given an initial start of Rs.660. As regards the contention of discrimination Civil Writ Petition No.7237 of 1989 (O&M) - 3 - for providing for 3 or 5 advance increments to Vernacular and Arts & Crafts teachers, it is urged by the State that they had been granted only the pay scales of Rs.570-1080. While the Masters and Mistresses were placed in the pay scale of 620-1200, they were not in the same category to complain of discrimination. 3. While I can accept the plea of the State that the petitioners, who are Masters/Mistresses were of different category from Classical and Vernacular teachers and, therefore, the petitioners could not have complained of any discrimination as regards the advance increments granted to the Classical and Vernacular teachers, I cannot understand the rationale of an initial start at Rs.660 for all classes of Masters/Mistresses, who were on a scale of 620-1200 including persons, who had been freshly recruited and given the benefit of a higher start. The petitioners points out to specific instances of how the notification created a discriminatory situation by tabulating a large number of persons like, Ruldu Singh, Bikram Dev Singh and Jaspal Singh, whose entry into service had been on 01.04.1977, 06.05.1976 and 01.04.1977 respectively but had all been given the start of Rs.660 on 01.01.1978, in the same way as persons, who had actually joined the service on 01.01.1978, got their pay fixed in the scale of 620-1200 with the start of Rs.660/-. While providing for a higher start within the pay band cannot itself be a cause for a complaint, it could not have been done in such a way as to equate persons, who had joined only on Civil Writ Petition No.7237 of 1989 (O&M) - 4 - 01.01.1978 with persons, who had joined earlier and who had earned increments in the pre-revised scale. If the freshly recruited persons on 01.01.1978 could obtain a higher start at Rs.660/-, it is another way of saying that they had obtained parity with other Masters or Mistresses, who had earned two increments or more in the pre-revised scale, but still when the new scales were put in operation, they (seniors) were already started at Rs.660 without minding the two increments earned in the pre-revised scale. 4. I recognize that the petitioners have a tenable grievance and if amongst the category of Masters and Mistresses, fresh incumbents on 01.01.1978 had been put on a higher start of Rs.660/-, the petitioners, who had been recruited earlier and who had gained increments in the pre-revised scale, were bound to be given the two increments keeping in with their respective early entry and suitable increments ought to be provided in the next higher scale. The petitioners are, therefore, entitled to the relief of grant of higher pay providing for as many increments as they had earned in the pre-revised scale in the pay band of 620-1200 over Rs.660 and the amount shall be calculated and paid to the petitioners within a period of 8 weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order. 5. All the writ petitions are allowed as above. (K. KANNAN) JUDGE 23.09.2011 sanjeev