Rohtash Kumar Vs State of Haryana and Ors. — Punjab & Haryana HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Rohtash Kumar Vs State of Haryana and Ors. — Punjab & Haryana HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Direction to respondent No.2, Director General, State Transport, Haryana, to treat the writ petition as a representation and pass a fresh order on the petitioner's claim for grant of technical pay scale in light of the judgment dated 25.03.2025 in Sarbans Singh and others (supra).

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner, appointed as Store-man on 01.04.1981 and thereafter promoted to Assistant Store Keeper and Chief Store Keeper, is entitled to the technical pay scale of Rs. 480-760 with effect from 01.02.1981 alongwith all consequential benefits. +1 more

Court's answer

The writ petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent No.2, Director General, State Transport, Haryana, to treat the petition as a representation and pass a fresh order on the petitioner's claim for grant of technical pay scale in light of the judgment dated 25.03.2025 in Sarbans Singh and others (supra).

Ratio / Principle

The disposal proceeds on the parties' consensus (ad idem) that the petition be disposed of with a direction to the respondents to reconsider the technical pay scale claim in light of the judgment in Sarbans Singh; this Court did not itself adjudicate entitlement on merits.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Punjab and Haryana High Court, CWP-12331-2013 (decision 27.05.2025, Vinod S. Bhardwaj, J.), Rohtash Kumar v. State of Haryana and others. The petitioner challenged the order dated 01.03.2013 of the General Manager, Haryana Roadways, Karnal Depot declining his claim for the technical pay scale of Rs. 480-760 with effect from 01.02.1981 with consequential benefits. Appointed Store-man on 01.04.1981 and later promoted as Assistant Store Keeper and Chief Store Keeper, he asserted that Store-man is a technical post under the Haryana State Transport Department, Haryana Roadways (Group 'D') Services Rules, 1998; Respondent No.3 had declined the scale on the ground that the post of Chief Store Keeper is included in the Ministerial Staff. Proceedings had been adjourned sine die pending L.P.A. No. 1040 of 2012 (State of Haryana v. Rajbir Singh, dismissed as withdrawn) and again pending CWP-11710-2014 (Sarbans Singh, decided 25.03.2025). The parties being ad idem, the writ petition was disposed of with a direction to respondent No.2, Director General, State Transport, Haryana, to treat it as a representation and pass a fresh order on the technical pay scale claim in light of the Sarbans Singh judgment dated 25.03.2025.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

101

CWP-12331-2013 Date of decision: 27.05.2025

ROHTASH KUMAR

......Petitioner

VERSUS

STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS

.......Respondents

CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD S. BHARDWAJ

Present: - Ms. Devanshi Sharma, Advocate for Mr. Sushil Bhardwaj, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Tapan Kumar, DAG, Haryana.

VINOD S. BHARDWAJ, J. (Oral)

The present writ petition has been filed raising a challenge to the order dated 01.03.2013 passed by the General Manager, Haryana Roadways, Karnal Depot whereby the claim of the petitioner for grant of technical pay scale of Rs. 480-760 with effect from 01.02.1981 alongwith all consequential benefits had been declined.

It is the specific assertion of the petitioner that he was appointed as a Store-man on 01.04.1981 and thereafter promoted to the post of Assistant Store Keeper and thereafter to Chief Store Keeper. It is submitted that Store-Man is a technical post and as such, he was entitled to the technical pay scale under the Haryana State Transport Department, Haryana

VISHAL SHARMA 2025.05.29 15:52 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CWP-12331-2013 -2-

Roadways (Group –‘D’), Services Rules, 1998. Respondent No.3 has declined the technical pay scale to the petitioner on the ground that the post of Chief Store Keeper is included in the Ministerial Staff and therefore the petitioner is not entitled for technical pay scale.

The matter was eventually adjourned sine die to await outcome of L.P.A. No. 1040 of 2012 titled as “State of Haryana versus Rajbir Singh and others” where the issue of the grant of technical pay scale to the persons holding technical posts was under consideration and the said LPA was dismissed as withdrawn. The matter was adjourned sine die again on 28.03.2016 to await the outcome of CWP-11710-2014 titled as “Sarbans Singh and others versus State of Haryana and others” which such petition stands decided vide judgment dated 25.03.2025. The parties are ad idem that the instant writ petition may be disposed of with a direction to the respondents to reconsider the case of the petitioner for grant of technical pay scale in light of the judgment that has been so passed.

The present writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondent No.2-Director General, State Transport Haryana to treat the instant writ petition as a representation and to pass a fresh order with respect to the claim of the petitioner for grant of a technical pay scale in light of the judgment dated 25.03.2025 in the matter of Sarbans Singh and others (supra).

(VINOD S. BHARDWAJ) MAY 27, 2025 JUDGE Vishal Sharma Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether Reportable : Yes/No

VISHAL SHARMA 2025.05.29 15:52 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document