CWP Nos.19001 of 2007 etc. 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. DATE OF DECISION: 28.10.2010 1.CWP No.19001 of 2007 Kartar Kaur and others ...Petitioner VERSUS State of Haryana and others …Respondents 2.CWP No.13693 of 2008 Jaipal ...Petitioner VERSUS State of Haryana and others …Respondents 3.CWP No.2773 of 2010 Pala Ram ...Petitioner VERSUS State of Haryana and others …Respondents CORAM HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE PERMOD KOHLI PRESENT: Mr. Vikas Chatrath, Advocate for the petitioners Mr.RD Sharma, DAG, Haryana for respondents CWP Nos.19001 of 2007 etc. 2 Permod Kohli, J. (Oral) Keeping in view the controversy involved and with the consent of learned counsel for the parties, these petitions are disposed of by this order at motion stage itself as common questions of law and facts are involved therein. Some of the petitioners are working as JBT Teachers whereas some are working as Head Teachers/SS Master/PTI. They are aggrieved of the orders passed by the respondents for reduction in their emoluments and consequential recovery. The challenge is primarily on the ground that the officer/authority, namely, the District Primary Education Officer is not competent to pass the order. In support of their contention, the petitioners have placed reliance upon a Division Bench judgment of this Court dated 29.4.2004 passed in CWP No.3067 of 2004 (Annexure P-12) and another judgment dated 11.1.2006 passed by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court in CWP No.273 of 2005 (Annexure P-7). To the contrary, the submission on behalf of the State is that the District Primary Education Officer is the competent authority. However, from the perusal of the aforesaid judgments, it appears that this Court has declared the said authority as incompetent to pass the order. Be that as it may, the controversy has arisen and is required to be resolved. Without going into the merits of the controversy and respective contentions of the parties, these petitions are disposed of with a direction to the Director Primary Education, Haryana to examine the controversy raised by the petitioners and pass fresh speaking and reasoned order, after affording opportunity of being heard to the petitioners. CWP Nos.19001 of 2007 etc. 3 Till fresh order is passed, no recovery shall be effected from the petitioners. Copy of this order be placed on record of each concerned file. (PERMOD KOHLI) JUDGE 28.10. 2010 MFK CWP No.10585 of 2010 4