RAM SWARUP Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONERS Ram Swaroop and others have filed the present writ petition invoking Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking quashing of the order purported to have been passed by the respondents by virtue of which the benefit of one increment already granted to the petitioners under Rule 4.4(a)(i) of the Civil Punjab Services Rules, Volume 1, Part I, is being withdrawn.

(2.) THE relevant facts are that the petitioners were appointed as teachers. They were granted higher pay scale on acquiring higher qualification. They were granted the benefit of one increment under Rule 4.4(a)(i) of the Punjab Civil Services Rules, Volume I, Part I (for short "the Rules") from the date they were actually promoted as Masters. The Director, Secondary Education, Haryana, issued a letter on 17.6.1996 to all the District Education Officers and directions were issued that those employees who have already been granted the benefit of Master's grade from the date of passing B.A.B.Ed. qualification, there is no justification to grant again the benefit of promotion in Master's scale.

(3.) IN the written statement filed, the petition as such has been contested. It has been pleaded that the function of the petitioners is to teach the students for which they were appointed. It is immaterial that they teach the 5th class or 6th class to 10th class. By teaching the 6th to 10th class on promotion, there is no higher responsibility as they were not promoted on administrative posts. No higher responsibility is involved in their case as they were supposed to teach the students whether they are 5th class students or 10th class students. The petitioners have already been granted higher pay scale on their acquiring higher qualification. Therefore, they were not entitled to one additional increment under Rule 4.4(a)(i) of the Punjab Civil Services Volume I, Part I, on their promotion to the post of Masters. They were already enjoining the benefit.