Civil Writ Petition. No.5424 of 2008 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition. No.5424 of 2008 Decided on : 28-07-2009 Leela Devi .... Petitioner VERSUS State of Haryana, Chandigarh and others .... Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SATISH KUMAR MITTAL. Present:- Mr. Ravi Kant Sharma, Advocate, for the petitioner. Ms. Kirti Singh, AAG, Haryana, for respondent Nos. 1 & 2. Mr.Raman B Garg, Advocate, for respondent No.3. SATISH KUMAR MITTAL, J (Oral). The petitioner, who has worked on daily wages during the strike period (from 16.12.1996 to 4.1.1997) as Safai Karamchari, has filed this petition. It is the case of the petitioner that on 16.2.1998, the Government took a decision to adjust those Safai Karamchari, who worked during the strike period against the regular vacancies, which fall vacant on account of retirement, resignation etc. during the next two years. Since the petitioner has worked during the said period and subsequently, she has also worked on daily wages from 1.2.1997 to 20.9.2005 (intermittently with breaks), keeping in view the said facts, she was regularized on Civil Writ Petition. No.5424 of 2008 -2- the post of Safai Karamchari on 20.09.2005 (Annexure R-3/1) in the regular pay-scale of Rs.2550-55-2660-60-EB-3200. She joined regular service on 29.9.2005. In this petition, the petitioner is claiming two reliefs; firstly, for releasing her salary from December, 2007 onwards, which was not paid to her and secondly, for the payment of salary as per regular pay-scale for the period she worked on daily wages along with annual increments and pay all the consequential arrears found due to her. Regarding the first claim of the petitioner, concededly the entire salary has been paid. As far as the second claim is concerned, I do not find any ground to grant the said benefit to the petitioner. The petitioner was regularly absorbed on 20.9.2005 and thereafter, she did not make any grouse about granting of the regular pay-scale while she was working on daily wages. When the petitioner had worked on daily wages and her services were regularized, her scale was subsequently revised. So, she is not entitled for this benefit. No merit. Dismissed. 28th July, 2009. (SATISH KUMAR MITTAL) Monika JUDGE