RSA No. 2704 of 2008(O&M) 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH -- RSA No. 2704 of 2008(O&M) Date of decision: 21.08.2008 State of Haryana and others .......Appellants Versus Ronak Ram, Assistant Welder .......Respondent Coram: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIRMALJIT KAUR Present: Mr. Himanshu Raj, AAG, Haryana for the appellants-State -.- NIRMALJIT KAUR , J. C.M. No. 7918 C of 2008 This is an application for condonation of delay of 28 days in filing the appeal. For the reasons mentioned therein, the application is allowed and the delay in filing the appeal is condoned. Main appeal The plaintiff filed suit seeking declaration to the effect that he is entitled to the revised pay scale of Rs.1200-2040 from 01.05.1990 and also for arrears up to date, along with interest. The suit was decreed vide the judgment and decree dated 17.05.2006 passed by the learned Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division), Kaithal. The appeal against the said judgment and decree was dismissed vide judgment and decree dated 21.04.2008 passed by learned District Judge, Kaithal. The present regular second appeal has been filed against the RSA No. 2704 of 2008(O&M) 2 concurrent findings of both the Courts below. The only question raised by the appellants/defendants is that both the Courts below have committed a grave error in holding that the post held by the respondent/plaintiff is a technical post. I have heard learned State counsel. Admittedly, the plaintiff is a matriculate and a diploma holder in ITI in Welder Trade. The case of the appellants/defendants is that the plaintiff was appointed through the Employment Exchange as Helper Radiator Repair. Both the Courts below after taking into consideration the evidence, have recorded a concurrent finding that the post of the Helper was a technical post and it was also held that the minimum qualification for the said post was matriculation with ITI certificate. Hence, the plaintiff was entitled to the revised pay scale. No argument has been raised to show as to how the post held by the plaintiff was not a technical post. The second argument raised by the appellants/defendants is on the question of limitation. Since the revision of pay scale is recurring cause of action, the claim of the plaintiff is not time barred and while granting the relief, the Courts below have limited the relief with regard to grant of arrears only to the period starting three years prior to the filing of the suit. Hence, no interference is called for. No question of law, much less substantial question of law arises for consideration in the instant appeal. Accordingly, the regular second appeal is dismissed in limine. [NIRMALJIT KAUR] JUDGE August 21, 2008 mohan RSA No. 2704 of 2008(O&M) 3