SUKHDIP SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This order would dispose of Civil Writ Petition Nos. 18307 of 1996, 12914 of 1997, 11729 of 1997, 3441 of 1997, 15297 of 1997, 16409 and 6026 of 1997 as the common question of facts and law is involved in all the cases.

(2.) The only claim which has been made by the petitioners is that they are entitled to one advance increment on account of higher responsibility after being promoted as Head Teacher/Centre Teachers as these posts have grater responsibility. The claim has been made on the basis of Rule 4.4.(a) (1) of the Punjab Civil Services Rules, Volume 1, Part 1. All these petitions had been admitted for determination of the above said question. It has been brought to my notice that the question stands answered by the Apex Court in Civil Appeal. No. 15057 of 1996 decided on 18.11.1996. Their Lordships of the Supreme Court have interpreted to the benefit of the incumbent, i.e., that when a person is appointed as Head Teacher/Center Head Teacher, he is entitled to draw one advance increment in his old post in the time scale next above the substantive pay on the date of his promotion as a Head Teacher/Center Head Teacher temporarily/permanently. The interpretation given by the Apex Court reads as under: " A reading thereof would clearly indicate that initial substantive pay of a Government employee who is appointed substantively to a post on a time scale of pay is regulated, if he holds a lien on permanent post, other than a tenure post and when appointment to the new post involves the assumption of duties or responsibilities of greater importance, then he will draw of initial pay the stage of the time scale next above his substantive pay in respect of the old post. Thus, it could be seen that when JBT Teachers was appointed temporarily as a Head Teacher, he is entitled to draw, since he is holding responsibilities of greater importance as a Head Teacher, one advance increment in his old post in the time scale next above the substantive pay on the date of his temporarily promotion as a Head Teacher. The Appeal is accordingly allowed. The order of the High Court stands modified. They are entitled to one advance increment in the scale of JBT Teacher at the time of promotion while discharging the duties as Head Teachers. No costs".

(3.) It has been further brought to my notice that the stand of the State in the written statement has been that against the judgment of learned Single Judge of this Court,Letters Patent Appeal No. 295 of 1996 is pending, However, the said IPA also stands decided vide order dated 15.5.1997 and the same has been disposed of in terms of the judgment rendered by the Apex Court referred here above.