CWP No.1353 of 1990 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. CWP No. 1353 of 1990 Date of decision 22.4.2009 Avinash Kumari and others ..Petitioners Versus State of Punjab and others ... Respondents. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M. KUMAR Present: Mr. Amit Chopra ,Advocate for the petitioners Ms.Sudeepti Sharma, DAG Punjab. 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgement ? 2. To be referred to the Reporter or not ? 3. Whether the judgement should be reported in the Digest ? M.M.KUMAR, J. This petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution prays for issuance of direction to the respondents not to withdraw the benefit of Proficiency Step ups granted to the petitioners on completion of their 8/18 years of service in view of the instructions issued by the State Government after counting the period of service rendered by the petitioners on adhoc basis. The petitioners were appointed as teachers/ masters in the Punjab Education Department on adhoc basis. Their services were lateron regularised as such. Before regularisation of their services as teacher/masters the petitioner served the respondents as such on adhoc basis for different periods ranging from 1 years to 5 years. On regularisation of the services of the petitioners, the benefit of the period of service rendered by them on adhoc basis was granted to them. The CWP No.1353 of 1990 2 petitioners were given one annual increment for each completed period of service even on adhoc basis and their pay was accordingly fixed. It is averred in the petition that pay scales of the Punjab Government employees were revised and every time the pay of the petitioners was fixed in the revised scale of pay after counting total service rendered by them on work charged basis. On the recommendations of the Third Pay Commission, the pay scales of the Punjab Government employees including that of the petitioners have been revised w.e.f. 1.1.1986 and the Government decided that besides grant of regular annual increments, one additional increment on each occasion on completion of 8 years and 18 years of service on or after 1.1.1986 in the form of proficiency step ups be also granted (P.2). On the revision of the pay scales of the employees w.e.f. 1.1.1986, the petitioners have also been granted revised pay scale but they have not been granted the benefit of additional increment in the form of proficiency step ups on completion of their 8 and 18 years of service after counting the period of service rendered by them on adhoc basis. Ms.Sudeepti Sharma, learned State Counsel has put in appearance on behalf of the respondents. At the outset, learned counsel for the parties have stated that the issue raised in this petition is no longer res-integra as the similar issue came up for consideration of Hon'ble the Supreme Court in the case of Punjab State Electricity Board and others v. Jagjiwan Ram and others (2009)3 SCC 661 wherein their Lordships in para 21 has held as under: “21. For the reasons mentioned above, we hold that the respondents were not entitled to the benefit of time bound promotional scales/ promotional increments on a date prior to CWP No.1353 of 1990 3 completion of 9/16/23 years' regular service and the High Court committed serious error by directing the appellants to give them benefit of the scheme by counting their work charged service. “ In view of the above enunciation of law, the instant petition is liable to be dismissed. Accordingly the writ petition fails and the same is dismissed. (M.M.Kumar) 22.4.2009 Judge okg