Disposed

Ranjit Singh & Ors. v. State of Punjab & Ors.

Punjab & Haryana HC14 Jul 2011CWP/10394/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of the petition following a prior judgment (Balbir Singh case), directing the State to consider granting pay scale parity to Art/Craft teachers equivalent to Honu/Punjabi/Urdu teachers within four months.

What did the court decide?

Directed the State to consider the petitioners' claim for pay scale parity and grant consequential benefits within four months.

Ranjit Singh & Ors. Vs State of… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Punjab & Haryana HC (2011)

¶1

1 –

¶2

CWP No.10394 of 2011.doc

¶3

HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

¶5

CWP No.10394 of 2011 (O&M) Date of Decision: 14.07.2011 ****

¶6

Ranjit Singh & Ors. . . . . Petitioners

¶7

VS.

¶8

State of Punjab & Ors.

¶9

. . . . Respondents

¶10

¶11

CORAM : HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT

¶12

¶13

1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?

¶14

2. To be referred to the Reporters or not?

¶15

3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?

¶16

¶17

Present: Mr. RK Arora, Advocate for the petitioners

¶18

¶19

SURYA KANT J. (ORAL)

¶20

(1). Notice of motion. Mr. BS Chahal, learned DAG Punjab accepts notice on behalf of the respondents. Having regard to the nature of the order which I propose to pass, there is no necessity to call upon the respondents to file their counter-reply(ies), at this stage.

¶21

(2). The petitioners are working as Art & Craft Teachers/PTI/Drawing Teachers etc. in the Education Department, Government of Punjab. They seek a mandamus to direct the respondents to grant them the pay scale(s) equivalent to Hindi/Punjabi/Urdu Teachers of the State.

¶22

2 –

¶23

CWP No.10394 of 2011.doc

¶24

(3).

¶25

This Court vide judgement dated 07.05.2009 rendered in CWP No.16380 of 1989, ( Balbir Singh & Others vs. State of Punjab & Others) and other connected matters, considered the same issue and has held as follows:-

¶26

“In view of the totality of the circumstances and the factual and legal position noticed herein above, I am of the considered view that the impugned notification dated 17.02.1989 is not sustainable in law and is liable to be quashed to the extent it has provided different pay scales for the petitioners who are Art & Craft, PTI, MTI, Drawing Masters and Agriculture Teachers. They will be entitled to the same pay scale i.e. Rs.1640-2925 as has been granted to the Hindi, Punjabi, Urdu teachers.”

¶27

(4). This petition is, accordingly, disposed of in terms of the decision in Balbir Singh’s case (supra), reproduced above. The respondents are directed to consider the claim of the petitioners as noticed above and if they are found entitled, the consequential benefits shall be granted to them within a period of four months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. (5). Ordered accordingly. Dasti .

¶28

14.07.2011

¶29

vishal shonkar

Ranjit Singh & Ors. v. State of Punjab & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ranjit Singh & Ors. v. State of Punjab & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Harbans Singh Vs State of Punjab and Ors.

Smt.Satya Kansal (Directions) Vs Pb.St. (Pension)

Manjinder Singh Boparai etc. Vs State of Punjab and Ors.

Girdhari Lal Bansal Vs State of Punjab and Ors.

Sukhdev Sharma and Ors. Vs State of Punjab and Anr.

Tilak Raj Vs State of Punjab and Ors.