CWP No.11677 of 1988 :1
In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh.
Date of decision:16.12.2008
Surjit Kaur ... Petitioner
Versus
State of Punjab and another ... Respondents
Present: None for the petitioner.
Mr.SS Sahu, Assistant Advocate General, Punjab,
for the respondents.
PERMOD KOHLI, J. (Oral):
I have heard the learned counsel for the respondents at
length and perused the paper-book.
The petitioner was appointed as a Social Education
Teacher in the Punjab Social Education Department on 12.12.1953. It
is alleged that she has undergone various refresher courses for women
Social Education Workers at various training centres during 1954 to
1957. On the basis of her work, she was promoted as Supervisor in the
pay scale of Rs.110-250/- with effect from 28.10.1966 for a period of
six months, but relieved of the higher responsibility with effect from
27.04.1967 and again deputed on survey work. Thereafter the
petitioner was appointed as Assistant Supervisor of the mobile squad
of social Education at Dharam Kot in the pay scale of Rs.50-3-80/4-
100/- and has worked against the said post on regular basis since then.
The grievance of the petitioner is that though she has
worked as Assistant Supervisor, but she has not been granted the pay
CWP No.11677 of 1988 :2
scale attached with the post. It is further stated that a number of other
persons named in paragraph 10 of the writ petition including one
Kamla Sahni who was Matriculate and junior to the petitioner, has been
placed in the higher pay scale.
The claim of the petitioner is however, resisted by the
respondents on the ground that the petitioner was not qualified to hold
the post of Assistant Lady Supervisor for which the qualification is
prescribed as B.A.B.T. Or B.A. with SEO Course or Matric with two
years diploma course and training course. It is stated that the petitioner
is simply B.A and is not entitled to be placed in the higher scale of pay
for want of requisite qualifications. She was appointed as Assistant
Supervisor in her own pay and in view of the reply filed, the petitioner
is not qualified to hold the post in question,therefore, no direction can
be issued for grant of higher pay scale to the petitioner for want of
requisite qualification.
In view of the above, I find no merit in the present petition
and the same is hereby dismissed with no order as to costs.
16.12.2008. (PERMOD KOHLI)
BLS JUDGE
Note: Whether to be referred to the Reporter? YES/ NO