CWP No.16894 of 1989 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP No.16894 of 1989 DATE OF DECISION: March 18, 2011 PRITAM KAUR & OTHERS ...PETITIONERS VERSUS STATE OF PUNJAB & 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: NONE FOR THE PETITIONERS. MS. REETA KOHLI, ADDL.A.G., PUNJAB. K.KANNAN, J.(ORAL) 1. Through the impugned order, office of the District Education Officer provided for the release of benefit of higher responsibility increment to the petitioners who were serving as Masters and Mistresses, under Rule 4.4(a)(i) of the Punjab Service Vol.I Part I, who had been promoted to the posts of Masters and Mistresses w.e.f. 20.10.1972/2.1.978. The order contained restriction of such benefit which had been extended only for a period of 38 months and the justification of such restriction was a judgement of this Court in Vidya Sagar Singla vs. State of Punjab in CWP No.2632 of 1985 dated 21.2.1986. Said judgement stated that persons who were having higher qualifications at the time of the entry into service would be entitled to advance increments in the light of the particular directions already given, but if there was any accumulation for arrears for higher scales, they would stay restricted to a maximum period of 38 months prior CWP No.16894 of 1989 -2- to the issue of instructions. The petitioners who were aggrieved by the impugned instructions have come by this writ petition. There is no representation for the petitioners to meet the objection given by the State and the justification that they have made by reference to a judgement of High Court. 2. There is no scope for quashing the direction and the petition is dismissed. March 18, 2011 (K.KANNAN) Gulati JUDGE