Rameshwar Dass And Others vs State Of Punjab And Others on 10 March, 2009

       IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

                             CHANDIGARH

                         C.W.P. No. 8840 of 1989

                  DATE OF DECISION: March 10, 2009

Rameshwar Dass and others

                                                              ...Petitioners

                                  Versus

State of Punjab and others

                                                            ...Respondents

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M. KUMAR

Present:    Mr. Raj Paul Kansal, Advocate,
            for the petitioners.

            Ms. Sudeepti Sharma, DAG, Punjab,
            for the respondents.
1.    Whether Reporters of local papers may be
      allowed to see the judgment?
2.    To be referred to the Reporters or not?
3.    Whether the judgment should be reported in
      the Digest?


M.M. KUMAR, J.

This order shall dispose of C.W.P. Nos. 8840 and 16954 of

1989 as common question of law and facts are involved. The petitioners

have prayed for commanding the respondents to grant them benefit of three

advance increments and consequential benefits such as arrears of pay etc. on

having acquired Gyani Degree and in view of the fact that such increments

have already been granted to the teachers posted against the posts meant for

Classical and Vernacular cadre.

The matter is no longer res integra. The issue raised in these

petitions has already been settled by this Court in the case of Jagdish

Chander Walia and others v. State of Punjab and others (CWP No.
C.W.P. No. 8840 of 1989 2

3818 of 1978, decided on 25.11.1983) wherein as per the provisions of the

Punjab Civil Services (Revised Scales of Pay) Rules, 1969, all the

employees in the cadre were held entitled to the advance increments on the

basis of qualifications. Letters Patent Appeal No. 214 of 1984 filed against

the said decision was also dismissed on 20.2.1984 and no further appeal was

preferred. The decision in the case of Jagdish Chander Walia (supra) has

also been followed by the Division Bench in the case of Sarwan Singh and

others v. State of Punjab and another (Civil Writ Petition No. 4789 of

1987, decided on 9.11.1987) and subsequently by the Single Judge in the

case of Faquir Singh and others v. State of Punjab and others (C.W.P.

No. 1844 of 1986, decided on 19.4.1989).

In view of above, I am of the considered view that the instant

petitions are squarely covered by the judgment rendered in the case of

Jagdish Chander Walia (supra). Accordingly, following the same

principle and precedent, I allow these petitions in terms of the judgment

rendered in the case of Jagdish Chander Walia (supra).

                                                         (M.M. KUMAR)
March 10, 2009                                               JUDGE
Pkapoor