IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No.2625 of 2010 Date of Decision: September 16, 2011 Jaibir Singh Malik & others ...Petitioners Versus State of Haryana & others ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RANJIT SINGH 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? Present: Mr.Akshay Jain, Advocate, for Mr.Anil Malik, Advocate, for the petitioners. Mr.Harish Rathee, Sr.DAG, Haryana, for the State. ***** RANJIT SINGH, J. The petitioners were appointed as Junior Engineers on 1.1.1986. Haryana Government revised the pay scales of all categories w.e.f. 1.1.1986 and the scale of ` 700-1250 was revised to `1640-2900. 50% of the cadre was allowed scale of `1400-2300. Besides, the Junior Engineers appointed by way of direct recruitment were also given some scales as noted in the writ petition. The association of Junior Engineers filed a representation and the Government had constituted a committee to remove the anomaly. The said committee had decided to revise the pay scale of Junior Engineers from `1400-2300 to `1640-2900 and accordingly sent its recommendation to the Government. The formal notification was issued on 27.1.1992 and the anomaly in the pay scale of Junior Engineers working in all the Government Departments was removed Civil Writ Petition No.2625 of 2010 : 2 : w.e.f. 1.1.1992 instead of 1.1.1986. The petitioner's association had approached the authorities to remove the anomaly w.e.f. 1.1.1986. The Association had then filed a writ petition before this Court, which was allowed on 13.8.1999 by holding that the petitioners in the writ petition were entitled to revision of pay-scales w.e.f. 1.1.1986 and not w.e.f. 1.1.1992, but the arrears were restricted to a period of 38 months from the date of filing of the writ petition. The Special Leave petition filed by the State against the judgment has also been dismissed. Some other writ petitions have also been disposed of in the light of ratio of law laid down in the above writ petition. The petitioners accordingly have approached this Court for claiming the same relief. In the written statement filed, it is stated that the matter is under active consideration by the respondents and prayer is likely to be considered in the light of law laid down by this Court. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of with a direction to the respondents to decide the claim of the petitioners within a period of two months from the date of receipt of copy of this order and all arrears due be released by restricting it to a period of 38 months from the date of filing of the writ petition. September 16, 2011 ( RANJIT SINGH ) ramesh JUDGE