STATE OF PUNJAB Vs. RAKESH KUMAR AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This order shall dispose of a bunch of appeals* filed by the State of Punjab under Clause X of the Letters Patent against similar orders passed by the learned Single Judge allowing the writ petitions filed by the petitioner-respondent(s) in terms of the Single Bench judgment dated 13.8.2010 passed in CWP No. 12750 of 2009 (Sarabjit Singh and others Vs. State of Punjab and another) . In that case the appellant State of Punjab and the High Court of Punjab and Haryana were directed to place the petitioner-respondents, who are non-graduate Clerks, to place them in the pay scale of Rs. 5000-8100 with effect from the date the said pay scale has been allowed to the Graduate Clerks. These non-graduate clerks have been working in the Subordinate Courts of Punjab. They have been further directed to calculate and pay the differential amount of the pay scale to the non-graduate clerks within a period of four months, failing which they would be entitled to interest @ 6% from the due date till realisation.

(2.) It has remained undisputed that the judgment rendered by the learned Single Judge in the case of Sarabjit Singh (supra) was challenged by the appellant State of Punjab in LPA Nos. 287 and 288 of 2011. After noticing the factual position in detail, the Letters Patent Bench formulated the following question of law:

(3.) The Letters Patent Bench allowed the said appeals vide judgment dated 25.4.2011 by setting aside the judgment of the learned Single Judge rendered in Sarabjit Singhs case (supra) by holding that different pay scales could be granted to the graduate and non-graduate Clerks because it did not contravene Articles 14 and 16(1) of the Constitution. In that regard the Letters Patent Bench has placed reliance on various judgments of Honourable the Supreme Court rendered in the cases of State of Mysore Vs. P. Narasinga Rao, AIR 1968 SC 349 ; General Manager, Southern Railway Vs. Rangachari, AIR 1962 SC 36 ; V. Markendeya Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh, (1989) 3 SCC 191 ; State of Rajasthan Vs. Gopi Kishan Sen, 1993 Supp (1) SCC 522 ; Shyam Babu Verma Vs. Union of India, (1994) 2 SCC 521 ; Rajasthan State Electricity Board Accountants Association, Jaipur Vs. Rajasthan State Electricity Board, (1997) 3 SCC 103 ; Government of West Bengal Vs. Tarun K. Roy, (2004) 1 SCC 347 ; M.P. Rural Agriculture Extension Officers Association Vs. State of M.P., (2004) 4 SCC 646 ; and U.P. State Sugar Corporation Ltd. Vs. Sant Raj Singh, (2006) 9 SCC 82 . In paras 19 and 20, the Letters Patent Bench has made the following observations:-