IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No.10265 of 2008 Date of Decision : October 25, 2010. Jaskaran Singh .....Petitioner versus The Secretary, Government of Punjab, Department of Education and others .....Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT. Present : Mr.Mukand Gupta, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr.H.S.Brar, Additional Advocate General, Punjab. -.- 1. Whether Reporters of Local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? --- Surya Kant, J. (Oral) The petitioner seeks quashing of the communications dated 28.4.2007 and 6.6.2007 (Annexures P-7 & P-8 respectively) whereby he has been declined four advance increments which he claims on account of his Ph.D. degree. It is apparent from one of the impugned order (Annexure P-8) as well as the reply filed by the respondent-College that the petitioner though is entitled for the increments but the same have not been released as “he did not submit the original Ph.D. degree to the college which is a condition precedence........”. The record further reveals that the Management has finally recommended/ forwarded the petitioner's case to the State Government for necessary sanctions. C.W.P.No .10265 of 2008 2 The D.P.I. (Colleges) has also filed reply-affidavit wherein the claim of the petitioner has not been disputed but it is maintained that the increments are to be granted by the College and the State Government only gives 95% grant-in-aid to the College. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and keeping in view the fact that the entitlement of the petitioner to the advance increments is not in dispute, I am of the considered view that the petitioner cannot be denied the benefits admissible under the Rules on account of inter-se dispute between the Management of the College or the D.P.I. ( Colleges) on the issue of incurring the consequential expenditure. The writ petition is accordingly allowed with a direction to the Management of the College to release the due increments to the petitioner forthwith but not later than two months from the date of receiving a certified copy of this order and thereafter submit its claim to the D.P.I.(Colleges) which in turn is directed to consider the Management's claim for re-imbursement in terms of the grant-in-aid Scheme. Suffice it to say that if the college is entitled to the re-imbursement of the expenditure incurred by it on the advance four increments to be released in favour of the petitioner under the grant-in-aid Scheme, the arrears thereof shall also be included in the grand-in-aid to be released to the College. Dasti. October 25, 2010 (SURYA KANT) Mohinder JUDGE