MADALSA RANI Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner passed the Bachelor of Architecture Examination in the year 1972 and was appointed a Planning Assistant in the Department of Town & Country Planning, Haryana, Chandigarh on ad hoc basis in the pay scale of Rs. 450-700 vide letter of appointment dated 30.4.1973 Annexure P.1 to the petition. It is the admitted position that the petitioner continued to work as such till 20th December, 1978. The Haryana Public Service Commission advertised certain posts of Assistant Town Planners in the department and the petitioner being eligible for the said post, applied for the same through proper channels. She was selected for the post in the pay scale of Rs. 400-1100/- and was relieved from her post as Planning Assistant vide order dated 20.12.1978 Annexure P-2, to the petition and immediately took over on the new post. It appears that as a result of her appointment, her salary was reduced and she, accordingly, submitted a representation to the department praying that the last pay drawn by her in the post of Planning Assistant should be protected. These representations were rejected by the respondents vide orders Annexure P-4 and Annexure P-4/A dated 19.3.1981 and 14.9.1981 respectively. It is against these orders that the present petition has been filed.

(2.) Notice of motion was issued in this case and reply has been filed by the respondents Haryana State and the basic stand taken is that as the petitioner had joined service as an Assistant Town Planner as a fresh entrant, the benefit of her pay in the new post could not be given to her and that she was accordingly entitled to receive pay in the scale of Rs. 400-1100/- only.

(3.) Mr. Balram K. Gupta, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has argued that the action of the respondents in denying the benefit to the petitioner was against the express provisions of Rule 4.4.(c) of the Punjab Civil Service Rules Vol.I, Part-I (hereinafter called 'the Rules').