Himachal Pradesh High Court
Bij Ram & Ors vs State Of H.P. & Ors on 1 January, 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA
CWP No. 10927 of 2023
Decided on: 01.01.2024
Bij Ram & Ors ........Petitioners
Versus
.
State of H.P. & Ors .......Respondents
Coram
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RANJAN SHARMA, JUDGE
WHETHER APPROVED FOR REPORTING?
For the petitioners : Mr. Naresh Kaul and Ms. Sheetal
Kaul, Advocates.
of
For the respondents : Mr. Vishal Panwar, Additional
Advocate General
Ranjan Sharma, (Oral)
rt
Notice. Mr. Vishal Panwar, learned
Additional Advocate General appears and waives
service of notice on behalf of the respondents.
2. With the consent of the parties, the instant
writ petition, is taken up for disposal, at this stage, in
view of the order(s) intended to be passed herein.
3. The petitioners, have claiming promotional
increments on promotion from JBT to Head Teacher,
under Fundamental Rule 22(I) (a) (i) and the higher
pay fixation from the said due date(s) till day, have
filed the instant writ petition, with the following
relief(s):-
"i) That a writ in the nature of mandamus may
kindly be issued directing the respondents to fix
the pay of the petitioners in the Pay Band of
10300-34800+4400 Grade Pay with additional
.
3% promotional increment w.e.f. 01.10.2012 as
has been done with the incumbents promoted
to the post of Head Teacher after 01.10.2012
with all consequential benefits @9% P.A. in view
of the judgment dated 07.07.2023 passed in
CWP No.2500/2021 titled as Ranjit Singh
of
and Others V/s State of Himachal Pradesh &
Ors when the respondents vide orders dated
19.09.2023 & 21/22.09.2023 (Annexure P-2)
rt have decided to implement the same, in the
interest of justice.
ii) That a writ in nature of mandamus may be
issued directing the respondents to consider
and decide the representation Annexure P-3
dated 12.11.2023 during the pendency of the
writ petition, in the interest of law and justice."
4. Case of the petitioner(s), as submitted by the
learned Counsel, is that the petitioners were promoted
from the post of Junior Basic Teacher (JBT) to the post
of Head Teacher prior to 1.10.2012 and though the
JBTs who were promoted to the post of Head Teacher
on or after 1.10.2012 have been granted the
promotional increment(s) under Fundamental Rule
22(1)(a)(i) of the Fundamental Rules but this benefits
was denied arbitrarily to the petitioner(s). Learned
Counsel submits that the issue, as to whether the
incumbents who were promoted as Head Teacher alike
.
the petitioners herein before 01.10.2012 were entitled
for the promotional increments on the analogy of these
incumbents who were promoted as Head Teacher(s) on
or after 1.10.2012, and were even Juniors to the
of
petitioner(s) in service; stands decided by this Court, in
CWP No.2500 of 2021, decided on 07.07.2023,
rt
titled as Ranjit Singh & Ors vs. State of Himachal
Pradesh & Ors, Annexure P-3.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner(s) further
submits that the judgment in case of Ranjit Singh
(Supra) stands implemented by the respondents on
20.09.2023, Annexure P-2. He further submits that the
petitioner(s) being similarly placed cannot be singled
out and discriminated, which has resulted in giving
them less pay vis-à-vis their counterpart-Head
Teachers who were promoted as Head Teacher and
were junior to them in service. The denial of
promotional increments from due date has resulted in
giving less pay to the petitioners since their
promotion(s) as Head Teachers and even on revision of
scale w.e.f. 1.1.2016 till day, which is a recurring loss
.
whereas the junior Head Teachers promoted on or after
1.10.2012 were giving more pay, which was arbitrary,
illegal and violative of Articles 14 & 16 of Constitution
of India.
of
6. Per contra, Mr. Vishal Panwar, learned
Additional Advocate General submits that, in case, the
rt
petitioner(s) make a representation giving all details;
the same case shall be examined in light of the
judgment in case of Ranjit Singh (Supra).
7. Faced with this situation, and in view of the
request so made by learned counsel for the
petitioner(s), on instructions of the petitioner(s), this
Court permits the petitioner(s) to make a fresh
representation either separately or jointly to the
Respondent No.3-Director of Elementary Education,
Himachal Pradesh/Competent Authority, within two
weeks from today, in continuation of representation
dated 12.11.2023, (Annexure P-3); with further
directions to the aforesaid respondent to
consider/decide the representation and to pass
appropriate orders in the matter, within six weeks
.
thereafter.
8. Needless to say that, this Court has not
adverted to the merits of the matter and all questions of
facts of law are left open.
of
In the aforesaid terms, the instant writ
petition, as
rt well as, pending miscellaneous
application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of,
accordingly.
(Ranjan Sharma)
Judge
1st January, 2024
(himani)
