Haryana & Ors Vs. Rai Chand Jain &
Ors  INSC 438 (21 April 1997)
RAMASWAMY, D.P. WADHWA
O R D
E R Substitution allowed.
granted. We have heard counsel on both sides.
appeals by special leave arise from the judgment and order dated 2.11.1995 of
the High Court of Punjab & Haryana made in CMP No, 13493/91 & batch. It
is not necessary of narrate all the factual details. Suffice it to state that
the respondents claim payment of salary in the selection grade pay-scales which
the High Court has granted them. while we have taken the matter for final
disposal, Shri Pankaj Kalra, learned counsel for the respondent, has brought to
our notice the order issued by the Government on August 20, 1996 signed by the
Joint Secretary (Finance), for Financial Commissioner & Secretary to
Government, Haryana, Finance Department which reads as under:
am directed to invite your attention to the subject noted above and to say that
prior to 1.4.79 the Selection Grade to Grout C & D Category employees was
admissible on the basis of the number of permanent posts in a particular cadre
and later on, till 1.1.86, the date on which this practice was altogether
abolished, for determining the number of the Selection Grade posts, the
temporary posts in existence for the Selection Grade posts, the temporary posts
in existence for the preceding three years were taken into account.
No. 2143 of 1994 and 11255 of 1995 were filed in the High Court by some
teachers of the Education Department and while disposing these off, Hon'ble
High Court directed to grant the selection grade on the basis of total
strength, including permanent and temporary posts, with all consequential
benefits, to the petitioners. Thus the employees of the Education Department
have already been granted this benefit as per the judgment.
Government has, therefore, decided that the selection grade whereever available
prior to 1.1.86 may be worked out on the basis of total strength including
permanent and temporary posts and all consequential benefits including arrears
of 38 months preceding the date of such decision, be allowed to eligible
employees." In view the above direction, we are of the view that since the
Government itself has accepted to compute the selection grade wherever
available prior to 1.1.86 and to work it out on the basis of the total strength
of the cadre including permanent and temporary posts with consequential
benefits including arrears for 38 months preceding the date of the decision,
i.e., dated 20.8.1996, these cases need no interference.
Kalra, learned counsel has stated that fixation of 38 months for payment of
arrears is arbitrary.
find no force in the contention. It is for the Government to decide as a part
of the executive policy as to from which date the arrears would be granted to
the employees. The matter being executive policy in character, we do not think
that the decision taken by them is arbitrary violating Article 14 of the
view of the above order, we think that there is nothing for this Court to
interfere with the judgment of the High Court. The appeals are accordingly
dismissed. No costs.
___________ @ S.L.P. (C) No. 11705/95 Though the respondents have been served,
none is appearing either in person or through counsel. The controversy raised
in this case is covered by the judgment of this Court in State of Haryana &
Anr. v. Ravi Bala & Ors. [(1997) SCC 267].
In paragraph 4, this Court , following the decision is Wazir Singh v. State of Haryana
[(1995) Supp. 3 SCC 697] has held that such of the teachers who have obtained
the B.T. or B.Ed. degree would be entitled to higher grade with effect from the
respective dates of their acquiring that qualification. Therefore, they are not
entitled to higher scales of pay prior to the date of acquiring qualifications.
appeal is accordingly allowed. No costs.