IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No. 6907 of 2010 Date of decision : 21.01.2011 Krishan Lal .....Petitioner VERSUS Dakshin Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Limited and others ....Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RANJIT SINGH PRESENT: Mr. Ajay Chaudhary, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Parveen Gupta, Advocate for Mr. Narender Hooda, Advocate for the respondents. **** RANJIT SINGH, J. The present writ petition is filed by two petitioners. Petitioner No. 1 had been appointed as Work Charged T-Mate on 07.02.1970 whereas petitioner No. 2 was appointed on 01.10.1973. Services of petitioner No. 1 were regularized on 14.02.1979 and the services of petitioner No. 2 were regularized on 14.04.1979. Petitioner No. 1 has retired as Assistant Foreman on 30.09.2008 whereas petitioner No. 2 has retired as Lineman on 31.10.2007. The grievance of the petitioners is that the pay scale of similarly situated employees has been fixed by granting revised ACP scales and the arrears have also been disbursed. The pay scale of the petitioners has been revised by granting ACP but they have not been paid the arrears. The petitioners have filed this writ petition to claim that work charge services rendered by them be counted for the purpose of Civil Writ Petition No. 6907 of 2010 -2- pension and the services be also counted for the purpose of grant of ACP or Higher Standard Pay Scale. Counsel for the petitioner in support of his submission has placed reliance on Dilwar Singh versus Haryana Power Generation Corporation Ltd. and others 2006 (3) SCT 412. Both the issues i.e. for counting the work charge for the purpose of qualifying service for pension and for grant of additional increment after 8-18 years and for grant of Higher Standard Pay Scale after 10- 20 years of service, apparently, are squarely covered by this decision. Counsel for the respondents does not dispute this fact in any manner and rather concedes that both the issues are squarely covered by the decision by Dilwar's case (supra). Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed in the same terms. The arrears payable to the petitioners shall be restricted to 38 months prior to the date of filing the writ petition. January 21, 2011 (RANJIT SINGH ) rts JUDGE