IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH SHIMLA CWP No. 1210 of 2009 Reserved on: 21.7.2011 Date of Decision: 15.10.2011. B.R.Sharma and others …Petitioners. Versus. State of H.P. and others … Respondents. Coram: The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Deepak Gupta, Judge. Whether approved for Reporting? No For the Petitioners: Mr. Ajay Sharma, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr.Vivek Thakur, Addl. A.G. Deepak Gupta, J. 1. The short question involved in this case is whether the petitioners, who are working as Physical Education Teachers in the category of Classical and Vernacular Teachers are entitled to grant of special slab increments. The relevant instructions regarding slab increments are as follows:- “3. Slab increments to seniors in pay on 2.1.1978 may be allowed when persons working in the same cadre are fixed at the same stage (other than minimum) of the revised scale, but were drawing pay at different stages in the existing scale. 2 4. In case of persons of a particular cadre who are fixed at the minimum of the revised scale, but were drawing pay at different stages in the existing scale (Pre-revised) and were not benefited by more than Rs.75/- (Rupees Seventy Five) on 1.1.1978 on such fixation in the revised scale, the benefit of stepping up of pay with reference to such junior person in pay and seniority, who is most beneficial to the seniors stepping up the pay of seniors from the date of increment of such junior.” 2. In the year 1986 the Governor of Himachal Pradesh was pleased to grant three advance increments to Physical Education Teachers w.e.f. 1.1.1978 and this Court in a number of judgements including CWP No. 511 of 2001 decided on 13.5.2008 has clearly held that all Physical Education Teachers are entitled to grant of three advance increments. 3. The question which now arises is whether the petitioners are entitled to the benefit of slab increments or not. The stand of the petitioners is that they should be given slab benefit as has been given to the similarly situated employees in Kangra and Chamba districts. The State has not disputed the fact that similarly situated employees in Kangra and Chamba districts were granted this benefit but according to the State this slab increment has not been granted to the said teachers in accordance with law and steps have been taken to withdraw the 3 benefit granted to the teachers in Kangra and Chamba districts. 4. The law is well settled that if by mistake or error some benefit is given to one employee then other employees cannot claim that they should be treated in the same manner. There can be no claim for equality on the basis of a mistake especially when as is in the present case the State has taken a clear cut stand that steps are being taken to withdraw the benefit at Kangra and Chamba districts also. The petitioners belong to Una and Hamirpur districts. The question is whether they can claim slab increments as a matter of right or not. By virtue of being granted three advance increments they have been benefited by more than Rs.75/- as on 1.1.1978 on fixation in the revised pay scale and clause 4 quoted hereinabove clearly shows that when a person is benefited by more than Rs.75/- he cannot claim the benefit of the slab increment. Admittedly, the pay after re-fixation and grant of three extra increments has been fixed at Rs.620/- and the benefit is more than Rs.75/-. 5. Shri Ajay Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the benefit of three advance increments cannot be taken into consideration while considering the slab increments. There is no merit in this contention 4 because the instructions for grant of slab increments do not in any manner indicate that these three increments are not to be taken into consideration. Since the petitioners were benefited by more than Rs.75/- on re-fixation of salary on 1.1.1978 they cannot get benefit of slab increment also. The petition is, therefore, dismissed. No costs. 15th October, 2011. ( Deepak Gupta ) ™ Judge.