IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP. No. 5621 of 2010 Date of Decision: 30.3.2010. P.L. Aggarwal & others --Petitioners Versus State of Haryana and others --Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE PERMOD KOHLI. Present:- Mr. D.R. Bansal, Advocate for the petitioners. *** PERMOD KOHLI.J (ORAL) Notice of motion. Mr. R.S. Kundu, Addl. A.G., Haryana has been asked to accept notice on behalf of respondents-State. Keeping in view the nature of relief claimed and with the consent of learned counsel for the parties, this petition is being disposed of at the motion stage itself. The petitioners were appointed as Junior Engineers in the years 1974 to 1983. They were promoted as A.S.D.E w.e.f. 1.1.2006 except petitioner no.8 who retired on 31.3.2004. The Govt. of Haryana revised the pay scale of employees w.e.f. 1.1.1986 and J.E.s were placed in the pay scale of Rs. 1400-2300/- and 50% of the cadre posts in the pay scale of Rs. 1640-2900. On account of certain anomalies the matter was referred to Anomaly Committee, which recommended modification of the pay scales. Accordingly, the J.E.s were placed in the revised pay scale of Rs. 1640- 2900 and 50% of the cadre strength in the pay scale of Rs. 2000-3200/- w.e.f. 1.1.1992. The petitioners are also claiming the benefit of the revised pay scales on the recommendations of the Anomaly Committee. CWP. No. 5621 of 2010 -2- It is agreed to by learned counsel for the parties that the controversy involved in this petition is squarely covered by various judgements of this Court including a judgement dated 11.4.2008 passed in CWP No. 16743 of 2001, wherein following directions have been issued:- “ In view of facts, mentioned above, we allow these writ petitions and direct the respondents to grant higher pay scales to the petitioners also, as was granted to the petitioners in Jagdeep Singh's case (supra) subject to the observation made. However, benefit of arrears is restricted to a period of 38 months prior to the filing of these writ petitions.” This petition is accordingly disposed of in terms of the aforesaid judgement. Petitioners shall also be entitled to the benefits in the same manner. (PERMOD KOHLI) JUDGE 30.3.2010. lucky