Punjab-Haryana High Court
Mangal Singh Kalsi vs State Of Punjab And Others on 4 March, 2024
Author: G.S. Sandhawalia
Bench: G.S. Sandhawalia
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:030437-DB
Neutral Citation No. 2024:PHHC:030437-DB
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
(113) LPA-980-2023 (O&M)
Decided on : 04.03.2024
Mangal Singh Kalsi
......Appellant(s)
Versus
State of Punjab and others
......Respondent(s)
CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE G.S. SANDHAWALIA,
ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE
HON'BLE MS.JUSTICE LAPITA BANERJI
Present: Mr. Ramesh Sharma, Advocate for the appellant (s).
Mr. Salil Sabhlok, Sr. DAG, Punjab.
*****
G.S. Sandhawalia, Acting Chief Justice (Oral)
CM-2514-LPA-2023
Application for condonation of delay of 31 days in re-filing the
present appeal, is allowed, in view of the averments made in the application,
duly supported by affidavit of the counsel. Delay of 31 days in re-filing the
appeal is condoned.
CM stands disposed of.
LPA-980-2023 (O&M)
Consideration in the present letters patent appeal is sought of the
order of the learned Single Judge dated 24.02.2023 passed in CWP-9312-2005
filed by the appellant, whereby the request for grant of parity of pay had been
rejected.
2. Vide the said order, the Learned Single Judge came to the
conclusion that the benefit had already been granted w.e.f. 01.01.1986 and
there was no conscious decision taken by the Government to equate the two
posts for the purpose of pay parity and it was a highly complex matter and
Courts are not experts and the Pay Commission or the Pay Anomaly
Committee are constituted for deciding the issues related to payment of
Government Employees. Resultantly, the writ petition was dismissed, while
placing reliance upon the judgment of the Apex Court passed in State of
Bihar Vs. Bihar Secondary Teachers Struggle Committee, Minger and
others, (2019) 18 SCC 301.
1 of 2
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:030437-DB
LPA-980-2023 (O&M) -2-
3. The claim as such in the writ petition was for grant of pay scales
equivalent/corresponding to Crafts Instructors in ITIs prior to 01.01.1986,
while raising challenge to the order dated 16.03.2005 (Annexure P-9). A
perusal of the said order would go on to show that the Special Secretary, Rural
Development and Panchayat Department had noticed that the writ petitioner
had been granted pay scale equivalent to the Craft Instructors w.e.f.
01.01.1986 and annual increments and proficiency step up increments were
also granted and the matter is under consideration with the Finance
Department. Claim as such was for the benefits prior to the cut-off-date and in
such circumstances is not liable to be granted, keeping in view the fact that it
is for the State to take a call and keeping in view the financial implications
involved and a decision regarding equivalence.
4. In such circumstances, the view taken by the Learned Single
Judge does not suffer from any infirmity, which would warrant interference in
the present letters patent appeal. Resultantly, the present letters patent appeal
is dismissed in limine.
(G.S. SANDHAWALIA)
ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE
(LAPITA BANERJI)
04.03.2024 JUDGE
Naveen
Whether speaking/reasoned : √Yes No
Whether Reportable : Yes √No
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:030437-DB
2 of 2
