IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP. No. 6921 of 2010 Date of Decision: 20.4.2010. Kanta Devi --Petitioner Versus State of Haryana and others --Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE PERMOD KOHLI. Present:- Mr. R.N. Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner. *** PERMOD KOHLI.J (ORAL) Notice of motion. Mr. R.K.S. Brar, Addl. A.G., Haryana has been asked to accept notice on behalf of respondents-State. Keeping in view the nature of relief claimed and with the consent of learned counsel for the parties, this petition is being disposed of at the motion stage itself. The petitioner was appointed as Hindi Teacher vide order dated 11.11.1997 on contractual basis on a consolidated salary of Rs. 3500/- per month for a period of 89 days. Somehow, the similarly situated persons, who were also appointed on consolidated wages filed writ petitions before this Court. One of the writ petition being CWP No. 18835 of 1997 came to be decided vide judgement dated 17.4.1998, whereby a direction was given to pay the regular scale to the writ petitioner. The judgement of the Hon'ble Division Bench was, however, modified by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in S.L.P to the extent that the wages shall be paid from the date of judgement. Accordingly, the petitioner and similarly situated persons were placed in the regular pay scale. In the year 1999 advertisement was issued for CWP. No. 6921 of 2010 -2- appointment of Hindi Teachers on regular basis. The petitioner also applied for the same and came to be appointed on 26.4.2001 on regular basis. At the time of fixation of the pay, the past service of the petitioner was also taken into consideration and his pay was fixed at Rs. 6025/-. Later on the pay of the petitioner was reduced to Rs. 5500/-. A representation made by the petitioner was accepted and he was paid the arrears of the difference of the emoluments. Later the pay of the Haryana Govt. employees was revised in the year 2008 w.e.f. 1.1.2006. According to the petitioner her pay has not been properly fixed and rather reduced. The petitioner made a representation dated 6.2.2006 and also served a legal notice dated 5.9.2006 but no decision has been taken thereon till date. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner would be satisfied, if, respondents are directed to take decision on the legal notice served by the petitioner, referred to above. In view of the above, this petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent no.2 to take decision on the legal notice served by the petitioner in accordance with law within a period of three months from the date certified copy of this order is served upon the said respondent. Needless to say that in the event the claim of the petitioner is to be rejected, the same shall be by a reasoned and speaking order. (PERMOD KOHLI) JUDGE 20.4.2010. lucky