Allowed

Sat Narain and Ors. v. State of Haryana and Ors.

Punjab & Haryana HC6 Jan 2010CWP/10982/1989

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a writ petition by police personnel transferred to function as instructors at training colleges. The court held that temporary instructors are similarly situated to permanent ones and entitled to the statutory Instructor Allowance, directing payment within three months with interest.

What did the court decide?

Petitioners entitled to P.T.C. Allowance at sanctioned rates; payment directed within three months with 6% interest thereafter.

Sat Narain and Ors. Vs State of… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Punjab & Haryana HC (2010)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶2

CWP. No. 10982 of 1989 Date of Decision: 6.1.2010.

¶3

Sat Narain Head Constable & others

¶4

--Petitioners

¶5

Versus

¶6

State of Haryana and others --Respondents

¶7

CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE PERMOD KOHLI.

¶8

Present:None for the petitioners.

¶9

Mr. Ramehswar Malik, Addl. A.G., Haryana.

¶10

¶11

PERMOD KOHLI.J (ORAL)

¶12

The petitioners were working as Constables, Head Constables and Assistant Sub Inspectors in Haryana Police in various districts of Haryana at the time of filing of this writ petition. They were transferred to discharge the duties as Instructors in the Police Training College, Madhuban and Recruit Training Centre, Madhuban and are claiming allowance at par with those, who are deputed to these institutes as Instructors. The case of the petitioners is that they were called to serve as Instructors from different districts vide different police radio messages to the Senior Superintendents of Police in the State of Haryana for sending the petitioners to Police Training College, Madhuban. They were sent to the said college by various orders passed in the year 1988 as detailed in para 4 of the writ petition, copy whereof has been placed as Annexure P-1 with this writ petition. The order clearly indicates that these officials were transferred from district to the training institute on temporary basis as Drill Instructors. It is stated that some of the petitioners were sent as Law Instructors and some as Drill Instructors. The State of Haryana issued

¶13

CWP. No. 10982 of 1989 -2-

¶14

instructions for grant of Instructor's allowance to the persons, who are deputed as Instructors in the aforesaid college. Under the instructions aforesaid allowance becomes payable to various categories in the following

¶15

manner:-

¶16

“ Name of the post	Rate of P.T.C Allowance per month.
Sub Inspector	Rs. 250/-
Asstt. Sub Inspector	Rs. 250/-
Head Constable	Rs. 225/-
Constable	Rs. 175/-”

¶17

The petitioners also claim the allowance on the same analogy as

¶18

they were also sent to the aforesaid training institutes to discharge the similar kind of duties.

¶19

The claim of the petitioners is, however, resisted by the respondents on the ground that under the Govt. instructions the allowance is payable only to those persons, who are deputed to the Police Training College, Madhuban and are drawing their salaries from the said institute, whereas the petitioners were sent to the college only for temporary duties to impart instructions either in law or drill but they were drawing their salaries from their parent establishments, hence, they are not entitled to the P.T.C allowance. It is, however, admitted position that the allowance is payable to the Instructors, who are deputed to the Training Colleges. The distinction sought to be created is totally artificial and illusory. It is further stated that no P.T.C allowance is being paid to anyone, who is sent to the Recruit Training Centre, Madhuban. However, one thing is admitted that the Govt. issued instructions for payment of the Instructor's allowance for the Instructors deputed to the Police Training College, Madhuban. Similar

¶20

CWP. No. 10982 of 1989

¶21

-3-

¶22

treatment cannot be denied to the petitioners or such other persons, who may be deputed to work as Instructors whether in one institute or the other. No reasons have been given how persons deputed to the Recruit Training Centre are different from those Instructors, who are imparting instructions in Police Training College, Madhuban.

¶23

In view of the above circumstances, the denial of the claim of the petitioners is totally unwarranted. Petitioners are similarly situated and entitled to the aforesaid allowance. This petition is, accordingly, allowed. It is directed that the petitioners shall be entitled to P.T.C. Allowance as is sanctioned vide Govt. instructions dated 28.2.1987 for the Instructors to the Police Training College, Madhuban.

¶24

Let the claim of the petitioners be paid within a period of three months from the date certified copy of this order is served upon the competent authority failing which petitioners shall be entitled to interest @ 6% after the expiry of aforesaid period till the amount is actually paid.

¶25

(PERMOD KOHLI) JUDGE

¶26

6.1.2010. lucky

Sat Narain and Ors. v. State of Haryana and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sat Narain and Ors. v. State of Haryana and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rajesh Singhal Vs State of Haryana and Ors.

Jagmal Vs State of Haryana & Ors.

Jugal Kishore Vs State of Haryana and Ors.

Bhoop Singh Vs Dgp Hry & Ors.

Sukhbir Singh Vs Director General of Police Haryana

Parmdeep Singh Vs UOI and Ors.