HARNEK SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) It is not necessary to narrate the facts of the case in any detail as the grievance of the petitioner can be culled out only by mentioning few facts.

(2.) Vide Notification of the Punjab Government dated 21.1.1969, the State Government revised the pay scale of Senior Instructors in Government Arts and Crafts Teachers Training Institute, Nabha. The pay scale was revised from Rs. 160-330 to 250-550 and it was further mentioned in the Notification that the Graduates would get two advance increments. Petitioner joined as a Senior Instructor in the said Training Institute on 27.2.1971. He claimed two advance increments, on the basis of Notification dated 21.1.1969, on the ground that when he joined as Senior Instructor, he was a Graduate. This benefit was denied to the petitioner on the ground that he had joined the Institute after the issuance of the Notification and that the benefit of two advance increments was only confined to two Sr. Instructors working in the Institute at the time of issuance of the Notification and the Notification would not ensure to the benefit of a Sr. Instructor who is appointed after the date of issuance of the Notification.

(3.) Mr. R.K. Chopra, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that revision of pay scale was not personal to the Sr. Instructors, who were working in the Institute on 21.1.1969, but a general revision of the pay scales of the post of Sr. Instructor for all times to come and if anybody who joined as Sr. Instructor and was a Graduate, was entitled to two advance increments under the Notification. Mr. Kakkar, however, on behalf of the respondents, submitted that it is indicated in the Notification that there were two Sr. Instructors in the Institute and whatever was the revision in the pay scale the benefit of that revision was only to be confined to those two Sr. Instructors.