IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. C.W.P. No. 20259 of 2006 DATE OF DECISION : 13.11.2009 Mukesh Kumar ... PETITIONER Versus State of Haryana and others ..... RESPONDENTS CORAM :- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SATISH KUMAR MITTAL Present: Mr. Surender Saini, Advocate, for the petitioner. Ms. Kirti Singh, AAG, Haryana, for respondents No.1 to 4. * * * SATISH KUMAR MITTAL , J. The petitioner, who is working as Lecturer (Electrical Engineering) in Chhotu Ram State College of Engineering, Murthal, District Sonepat - respondent No.3, has filed the instant petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, for directing respondents No.1 to 4 to grant him the same pay scale from the same date, as has been granted to respondent No.5, who is junior to the petitioner, with all consequential benefits. In the petition, it has been stated that the petitioner was appointed as Lecturer in Electrical Engineering in the respondent college on 29.9.1995 in the pay scale of Rs. 8000-13500. On 29.9.2001, after completion of 6 years of service, the petitioner was granted the Time Scale CWP No. 20259 of 2006 -2- (Senior Scale), and after completion of further 5 years of service, on 29.9.2006, he was granted the next Time Scale/Assistant Professor's Scale. The grievance of the petitioner is that respondent No.5, who was appointed as Lecturer in Mechanical Engineering on 16.9.1996 and was junior to the petitioner, was granted the Time Scale (Senior Scale) on 27.7.1998 and the second Time Scale/Assistant Professor's Scale on 27.7.2002. Therefore, in granting of these benefits, the petitioner was discriminated and he is also entitled for these two Time Scales with effect from the date, the same were granted to his junior (respondent No.5). In the written statement, though it has been admitted that respondent No.5 was appointed on 16.9.1996 and he was junior to the petitioner, but it has been stated that before joining the service in the respondent college, respondent No.5 was working as Lecturer in Mechanical Engineering at Vaish Technical Institute, Rohtak from 16.4.1991 to 15.9.1996. It has been further stated that in view of the notification dated 30.1.2004, respondent No.5 was given the benefit of the previous service and the said service was added in his qualifying service for the purpose of grant of aforesaid two scales. By taking into consideration the said period of previous service, respondent No.5 was granted the Time Scale (Senior Scale) with effect from 27.7.1998 and the Selection Grade with effect from 27.7.2003, after completion of 6 years and 5 years of service, respectively. Hence, the question of disparity with the petitioner and stepping up of his pay does not arise. CWP No. 20259 of 2006 -3- The aforesaid factual position has not been controverted by the petitioner, while filing the replication. No case has been set up in the replication that respondent No.5 was not entitled for the benefit of the counting of the past service rendered by him in Vaish Technical Institute, Rohtak. In view of the aforesaid factual position, the respondents have rightly granted the Time Scale (Senior Scale) to the petitioner on completion of six years of service on 29.9.2001 and the next Time Scale/ Assistant Professor's Scale on 29.9.2006 after completion of further 5 years of service. It is the conceded position that the petitioner does not have any previous service to his credit. No merit. Dismissed. November 13, 2009 ( SATISH KUMAR MITTAL ) ndj JUDGE