C.W.P No. 18976 of 2007 ::1:: IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.W.P No. 18976 of 2007 Date of decision : April 17, 2009 Bhupinder Singh, ...... Petitioner (s) v. The State of Haryana and others, ...... Respondent(s) *** CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE AJAY TEWARI *** Present : Mr. Namit Kumar, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Harish Rathee, Sr. DAG Haryana for the respondents. *** 1. Whether Reporters of Local Newspapers may be allowed to see the judgment ? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not ? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest ? *** AJAY TEWARI, J (Oral) In this writ petition, the petitioner claims higher pay scale of Rs.1200-2040 as per notification, Annexure P-3/A, wherein the Government decided to grant higher pay scale to persons who have minimum educational qualification of Matric with ITI certificate/Polytechnic. It is not disputed that the ITI Certificate of the petitioner is in the Electrical Trade, whereas he is working as a Motor Mechanic. Counsel for the petitioner has primarily argued on two grounds. The first contention is that originally within five months of his appointment C.W.P No. 18976 of 2007 ::2:: the petitioner's services were terminated on the same ground; when he approached this Court, the termination order was set aside, and liberty was granted to the respondents to proceed against him in accordance with law. It is argued that since no action was taken against the petitioner pursuant to that order and the respondents allowed the petitioner to continue, therefore, they cannot now deny him the higher grade. The second contention is that the notification (Annexure P-3/A) merely mentions the words `Matric with ITI Certificate/Polytechnic'. As per the counsel, since it is not mentioned that the certificate has to be in the relevant trade the petitioner is entitled to the higher grade. In my opinion, both these contentions are fallacious. The fact that the respondents did not take action against the petitioner as per the liberty granted to them would not entitle the petitioner to a higher grade. As regards second argument also, it has to be held that even if the said notification does not mention the words `in the respective trade', the said words would have to be read into it. There can be no purpose of giving a higher grade to a person who is not technically qualified in the trade where he is employed. Consequently, finding no merit in this writ petition, the same is dismissed with no order as to costs. ( AJAY TEWARI ) April 17, 2009. JUDGE `kk'