Research › Search › Judgment

Punjab High Court · body

2016 DIGILAW 475 (PNJ)

Shyam Kumar Sharma v. State of Haryana

2016-02-05

DEEPAK SIBAL

body2016
JUDGMENT : DEEPAK SIBAL, J. Through the present petition, the petitioners, as Sanskrit Teachers, seek parity in pay with Subhash Chander, who, according to them, is their junior. The dates of appointment (both on ad-hoc and regular basis) and the pay scales of each of the petitioners, as also the aforementioned Subhash Chander, are tabulated below : Sr. No. Name Date of joining on adhoc Date of regularization Pay fixed on 31.12.1995 Pay fixed on 01.01.1996 Pay after fixation of one increment on 01.09.1996 1. Shyam Kumar Sharma 27.09.1988 01.01.1991 Rs.1700/- Rs.5850/- Rs.6025/- 2. Ram Chander 22.09.1988 01.01.1991 Rs.1700/- Rs.5850/- Rs.6025/- 3. Ram Swaroop 22.09.1988 01.01.1991 Rs.1700/- Rs.5850/- Rs.6025/- 4. Shiv Dutt Kumar 22.09.1988 01.01.1991 Rs.1700/- Rs.5850/- Rs.6025/- 5. Satishwar Prashad 22.09.1988 01.01.1991 Rs.1700/- Rs.5850/- Rs.6025/- 6. Jai Kumar 27.09.1988 01.01.1991 Rs.1700/- Rs.5850/- Rs.6025/- Sr. No. Name Date of joining on adhoc Date of regularization Pay fixed on 31.12.1995 Pay fixed on 01.01.1996 Pay after fixation of one increment on 01.01.1996 1. Subhash Chander 16.01.1989 01.04.1993 Rs.1650/- Rs.5850/- Rs.6025/- On the basis of the facts as tabulated above, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that as on 01.01.1996, Subhash Chander's pay was Rs. 6025/-, in comparison to which, the petitioners' pay on the same date was Rs. 5850/-and as the petitioners had been appointed earlier to and that their services had also been regularized prior to Subhash Chander, they being senior to him, as on 01.01.1996, were entitled to be granted at least the same pay being given to him. The aforesaid submission of the petitioners, at first blush is attractive, but does not stand deeper scrutiny. The petitioners belong to District Yamuna Nagar, whereas Subhash Chander is of District Karnal. As per the applicable service Rules, which are the Haryana State School Education School Cadre (Group-C) Service Rules, 1998 (hereinafter referred to as – the Rules), the posts of Sanskrit teachers are district cadre posts. The petitioners belong to District Yamuna Nagar, whereas Subhash Chander is of District Karnal. As per the applicable service Rules, which are the Haryana State School Education School Cadre (Group-C) Service Rules, 1998 (hereinafter referred to as – the Rules), the posts of Sanskrit teachers are district cadre posts. In this regard, Rule 6(2) of the Rules is reproduced below :- “Rule 6 (2) Appointments to the post in the service in case of Sanskrit teacher, Hindi teacher, Punjabi teacher, Physical Training Instructor, Art & Craft Teacher (Drawing Teacher), Tailoring Teacher and Tabla Player shall be made by the respective District Education Officers of the concerned district.” The petitioners on one hand and Subhash Chander on the other, being in different districts, thus belong to different cadres and consequently, are borne on distinct seniority lists. Therefore, the petitioners are not senior to Subhash Chander and resultantly, cannot compare their pay with his. It is not the petitioners' case that any Sanskrit teacher junior to them in the District, to which they belong, is in receipt of higher pay. In the light of the aforesaid discussion, the petitioners are not entitled to any relief, as claimed by them. Dismissed. No costs.