CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.6235 of 2010 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.6235 of 2010 DATE OF DECISION: December 24, 2010 Raj Kumar & others .....Petitioners VERSUS State of Haryana & others ....Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RANJIT SINGH PRESENT: Ms. Alka Chatrath, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. Harish Rathee, Sr. DAG, Haryana, for the State. **** RANJIT SINGH, J. When this issue came up for hearing on 16.12.2010, Mr. Rathee had filed an affidavit of the Chief Secretary to Government of Haryana containing information about the technical posts in terms of the order passed by this Court on 20.9.2010, which reads as under:- “It is seen that in a large number of cases, people are approaching this Court for grant of technical pay on the ground that they are holding technical post. In almost all the cases, the State generally opposes such plea on the ground that the post held by the concerned petitioner is not a technical post. In CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.6235 of 2010 -2- some of the cases, this Court had already adjudicated and has held that the posts are to be treated as technical post. In some cases, the Court has taken a different view and has held that the post may not be a technical post. The issue needs to be settled to avoid persons approaching the Court time and again. It would be appropriate to direct the chief Secretary of the State to obtain information about the posts which are technical posts in various departments so that technical pay issue is settled. Chief Secretary may indicate the posts in different departments which are taken to be technical post requiring payment of technical pay and the posts which are not technical and person manning the post would not be entitled to technical pay. Adjourned to 9.11.2010, for Chief Secretary to do this exercise. At least the person holding the posts, which are held to be technical post, would not have to approach the Court over and over again.” On 16.12.2010, this Court had passed a detailed order on the basis of an affidavit filed by the Chief Secretary, which is as follows:- “Mr. Rathee today has placed before me an affidavit of Chief Secretary to Government of Haryana containing information about the technical posts in terms of the order passed by this Court. The lists of technical posts in various departments have been annexed alongwith this affidavit, where the qualification prescribed is Matric with ITI certificate/diploma from polytechnic and also those technical posts of various departments for which the CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.6235 of 2010 -3- prescribed qualification is non-matric with ITI. The affidavit also contains a list of departments in which there is no technical post and the list of those departments where the information is still awaited. The affidavit is taken on record. Let copy of this affidavit be supplied to the counsel appearing in the cases. Adjourned to 23.12.2010 to enable the counsel for the petitioners to see if the post held by the petitioner is now a technical post or not, so that all these writ petitions can accordingly be disposed of. To be fair to Mr. Rathee, he has placed before me a judgment passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of State of Haryana & Ors. Vs. Jagroop Singh, SLP (C) No. 16505 of 2001, decided on July 12, 2002, where the issue of availability of technical pay scale has been considered and decided. The claim of some of the persons held entitled to technical pay w.e.f. 1.1.1986 has been negated and the same has been allowed w.e.f. 1.5.1990. There is not much dispute that the petitioners would be entitled to technical pay scale, if otherwise permissible w.e.f. 1.5.1990 and that the arrears are required to be restricted for 38 months from the date of filing of the petitions. The counsel for the petitioners may consider this aspect also and make their submissions in case they so desire on the adjourned date.” Mr. Rathee today has placed on record an additional affidavit. The lists of technical posts in the remaining departments, for which qualification prescribed is Matric with ITI certificate/diploma and also those technical posts in the remaining CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.6235 of 2010 -4- departments where the prescribed qualification is non-matric with ITI, have been enclosed along with this affidavit. The affidavit also contains a list of department where no technical post exists and the list of two departments regarding which information is yet to be received. The said affidavit is taken on record. The counsel for the parties have been heard. It is conceded that the petitioners in this case are in receipt of technical pay w.e.f 1.5.1990. The claim in the present writ petition is for grant of these benefits w.e.f. 1.1.1986. In view of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in State of Haryana & Ors. Vs. Jagroop Singh, SLP (C) No. 16505 of 2001, decided on July 12, 2002, the said claim can not be allowed. This aspect is conceded by the counsel appearing for the petitioners in all such or similar cases and accordingly, the relief claimed in the present writ petition deserves to be rejected. The writ petition is, therefore, dismissed. December 24, 2010 ( RANJIT SINGH ) monika JUDGE