Davinder Kaur v. State of Punjab and Ors

IN T

Davinder Kaur

State of Punjab a

CORAM: HO

*** Present : Mr. Mr.

*** AMAN CHAUD

1.

Pray to grant benefit o

2.

Lea petition has been State of Punjab the case of the counsel despite position and draw cite any contrary

THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJ AT CHANDIGAR

CW

Dat

Versus

and others

ON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMAN ** PS Khurana, Advocate for the p Sehajbir Singh Aulakh, AAG, P ** DHARY, J. (ORAL) yer made in the present petition of three increments along with co arned counsel states that the i n decided by this Court in Piar b and others, CWP-23080-2022, petitioner and no LPA has be best efforts has been unable to w out any distinctive aspects in t y law, relevant paras whereof rea "2. Learned counsel submit the post of JBT/A&C in the higher qualification of Giani They were entitled to thre Government Instructions da been denied. As per the Inst

JAB & HARYANA RH WP-6562-2024 (O&M) te of decision: 22.01.2025

...Petitioner

...Respondents N CHAUDHARY petitioner. Punjab. is for directing the respondents onsequential benefits. issue involved in the present ra Lal Sharma and others vs. , decided on 16.01.2025, covers een filed, which learned State o controvert regards the factual the aforementioned judgment or ad thus:- ts that the petitioners joined on year 1972-76 and had acquired i/Prabhakar before 19.02.1979. ee advance increments as per ated 23.07.1957, however, has tructions dated 19.02.1979, the

benefit is not applicable to tho their qualifications subsequen had attained higher qualifica The matter at hand is squarel Sagar Singla and others v others, CWP-2632-1985, de which SLP was dismissed on recapitulated by this Court in Kaur and another vs. State on 07.06.1991. The relevant (supra) read under:-

"A reading of these com rules to which a refe makes it abundantly Government had decide to the employees cover graduate qualifications service or acquired the the stand of the respon revision of the pay s petitioners had not advantage of grant of a stage of their entry into acquisition of post-gra be futile. In order authorities have prima Punjab Government Annexure R1, the mat the issues read as follow "All trained graduates a graduate qualifications, of a Lecturer will be in 400/20-500. Advance i Science Masters who h M.Sc. Course at the ra the rate of two or one obtained by them is 'A' Even this letter, to m taking of the plea which authorities. It is manife Government did intend those Science Masters condensed Course on th that course. It looks uni the Government was t those employees only w Course and not to tho

ose appointed or who improved nt to 19.02.1979, however they ations prior to the cut off date. y covered by the case of Vidya vs. The State of Punjab and ecided on 21.02.1986, against n 08.04.1987, which was further n CWP-11758-1989, Jaswinder of Punjab and others, decided t paras of Vidya Sagar Singla mmunications in the light of the rence has already been made clear that at all stages the ed to grant advance increments red by these rules who has post-at the time of their entry into same later. In the light of this, ndent authorities that with the scales the employees like the to be given any additional advance increments either at the o service or at the time of their aduate qualifications, appear to to sustain this stand, these arily relied on a copy of the letter dated July 29, 1967. terial part of which relevant to ws:- and other masters with the post- ,who are not fitted in the scale n the scale of Rs.220-8-300-10-increments may be given to the have completed the concerned ate of two or one according as e according as the certificates ' or 'B' Class." my mind, does not justify the h is sought to be raised by these est from this letter itself that the d to give advance increments to who had completed the M.Sc. he basis of their performance in imaginable that the intention of to grant advance increments to who had done M.Sc. Condensed

degrees after comple Similarly, it appears b employees who h qualification in Arts, entitled to advance incr the members of the sam to which the empl qualifications in Scienc the instructions Annexu Government after the i R-1 and vide those ins which has already b Government made its face of these instructi respondent authorities repelled. In the light of the discu petitioners who were qualifications, i.e. M.A their entry into service the course of their se increments of pay in th with effect from the da the date of acquiring th directed that the respon pay of the petitioners in mine. For clearity s mentioned here that so far as the qu concerned, the letter A which they are primaril later instruction Annex and be confined to a m months prior to the issu P-3 i.e. February 19, 1 as to costs."

¶3The claim of the petitio Instructions dated 26.04.20 account judgments of Vidya Punjab and others vs. decided on 20.02.1996; Wa State of Haryana JT, 1995 vs. State of Punjab, C

20.11.1995; Dharam Pal vs. 1990, decided on 21.05.2009 State of Punjab and others

30.08.2010, where the aspe

eting the prescribed course. beyond any reason that those had acquired post-graduate such as M.As. would not be rements when they happen to be me class of service i.e. Class III, loyees having post-graduate ce subject belong. Besides this, ure P-3 were issued by the State ssuance of this letter Annexure structions - the relevant part of een reproduced above - the intentions amply clear. In the ions the present stand of the s essentially deserves to be ussion above, it is held that the e either having post-graduate A./M.Sc./M.Ed. at the time of e or acquired these later during ervice, are entitled to advance he light of Annexure P2 and P3 ate of their entry into service or he qualifications. It is, therefore, ndent authorities would refix the n the light of this conclusion of sake, it may, however, be question of payment of arrears is Annexure P3 – on the basis of ly succeeding supplemented by xure P4 would govern the same maximum period of thirty-eight uance of instructions Annexure

¶979I, however, pass no order oners is further substantiated by 018, issued after taking into Sagar Singla (supra); State of Joga Singh, LPA-374-1994, azir Singh JBT Teacher vs.

(7) SC 404; Kanwaljit Kaur CWP-3774-1995, decided on . State of Punjab, CWP-7514-9; Beant Singh and others vs. s, CWP-4634-2009, decided on

3.

The

22.01.2025 ashok

Wh

Wh

increments upon obtaining before specified date as well basis of credentials were d which reads thus: "Keeping position of Masters/mistress Department are advance increm qualification of appointed prior such qualificat

31.12.1985 onl petitioner who d been granted suc such benefit. Su to the arrear of from the date petition. With the the petitioners concerned D.E.O service record districts and act the claims of the compliance repo

15.05.2018 so t High Court m concerned D.E.O responsible for a these cases."

¶4Learned State Counse been unable to controvert the any distinctive aspects in the cite any contrary law.

¶5The present petition is of the judgment of Vidya Sag

¶6Pending applications, i

e petition is disposed of in terms

ether speaking

: ether reportable

:

g postgraduate qualifications payment of higher scale on the dealt with, relevant portion of in view the above and settled law, the only those ses working in the Education entitled to the benefit of 2/3 ments on acquiring the higher f post graduation who were to 19.02.1979 and acquired tion before this date until ly. In case of any of the do qualify such criteria had not ch benefit, would be entitled to uch petitioners shall be entitled pay, if any prior to 38 months of filing of the present writ aforesaid orders, the claim of shall stand settled. The O's are directed to check the of the petitioners of their accordingly. After deciding all e petitioners of your district, the ort must be sent to this office by that the order of the Hon'ble may be complied with. The O's (SE) shall be personally any kind of negligence/delay in el, despite his best efforts, has e factual position and draw out e aforementioned judgments or s thereby, disposed of in terms gar Singla (supra). f any, also stand disposed of." of Piara Lal (supra). (AMAN CHAUDHARY)