DESH RAJ AWASTHI Vs. STATE OF H. P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By way of instant petition, petitioner has prayed for the following substantive reliefs:-

(2.) Petitioner was appointed as Trained Graduate Teacher (TGT) along with other incumbents vide office order dtd. 6/10/1975. The petitioner approached the H.P. State Administrative Tribunal by filing O.A. No. 957 of 2003, with a grievance that he was being paid less pay than his juniors in the same cadre. His representation to the competent authority had been rejected on untenable grounds.

(3.) Petitioner averred that his name figured at Sr. No. 36 of office Order dtd. 6/10/1975, whereas, the names of S/Sh. Roshan Lal and Gian Chand figured at Sr. No. 42 and 54 respectively of the same office order. In all the subsequent seniority lists of TGTs, petitioner was placed higher than the said S/Sh. Roshan Lal and Gian Chand. Despite the fact that the said S/Sh. Roshan Lal and Gian Chand were juniors to petitioner, they were drawing higher pay than the petitioner. Petitioner represented his grievance to the Director of Education vide representation dtd. 18/8/1999 and 21/12/2000, through proper channel. His representation was forwarded by District Education Officer to the Director of Education vide communication dtd. 29/1/2001. However, the Director of Education vide letter dtd. 22/3/2001 rejected the claim of petitioner in following terms:-