CWP No.9960 of 1989 (O&M) -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP No.9960 of 1989 (O&M) DATE OF DECISION: March 7, 2011 BASHESHAR NATH AND OTHERS ...PETITIONERS VERSUS STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS ...RESPONDENTS CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.KANNAN. 1. Whether reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgement? No 2. To be referred to the reporters or not? No 3. Whether the judgement should be reported in the digest? No ---- PRESENT: MR. S.K. SHARMA, ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONERS. MR. RITA KOHLI, ADDL.A.G., PUNJAB. NONE FOR RESPONDENTS NO.3 TO 7. K.KANNAN, J.(ORAL) 1. The writ petition seeks for relief that the impugned order disallowing the scale applicable for Lab Attendants had been denied to the petitioners, although they were appointed after necessary training with the said post on 16.9.1974. In the impugned order, it was stated that the revised scales were not applied to the petitioners only because the petitioners did not have the requisite qualification as a Matriculate. The qualifications as given in the relevant rule, according to the petitioners, were applicable only for direct recruits and not for persons who were already in employment and who had been given specific training for the said post. The petitioners, therefore, brought instances in the establishment of how persons like Kehar Singh, Ram Karan, Gurmit Singh and Gulab Singh were all persons who did CWP No.9960 of 1989 (O&M) -2- not have Matric qualification, but they had been admitted to the revised scales. In paragraph 12 also, the petitioners contended that one Sham Lal who was a Swastik Sahayat had been granted scale after the training at the institute at Kharar. While responding to these averments by reply, respondents No.1 and 2 had admitted that such practice had been abandoned after 1.2.1978. Learned counsel points out that the averments in paragraph 10 and 12 are themselves not denied. If the practice of appointing non- matriculates to the post as Lab Attendants had been abandoned in 1978, it ought not to have been denied to the petitioners who had been admittedly employed earlier to 16.9.1974. 2. The claim of the petitioners is well-founded and the scale as admissible for the post as Lab Attendant will be calculated and given from the date of the writ petition and not from the date when they held their office on 16.9.1974. Any amount that would become payable by such a course shall be paid within a period of 8 weeks from the date of receipt of copy of the order. All attendant benefits to such revision shall also be applied to the petitioners. 3. The impugned orders are quashed and the writ petition is allowed to the above extent. March 7, 2011 (K.KANNAN) Gulati JUDGE