- (1.) By this common judgment, we propose to dispose of the above mentioned two appeals which have been preferred under Clause X of the Letters Patent against judgment dated 29.10.2003 of the learned Single Judge passed in CWP No. 16950 of 1998.
(2.) Since the narrative of facts has been taken from LPA No. 277 of 2004 preferred by the State of Punjab and others, we shall describe Shri S.C. Chadha as 'respondent No. 1' in the judgment, even though it will take in its fold LPA No. 76 of 2004 preferred by him.
(3.) Shri A.G. Masih, learned Senior Deputy Advocate General, Punjab contended that respondent No. 1, who filed the aforementioned writ petition, was working as Project Manager in the Punjab State Handloom and Textiles Development Corporation Ltd. (for short, 'the PUNTEX') in the pay scale of Rs. 4125-5600/-. He was declared surplus by the PUNTEX and sought fresh appointment as Treasury Officer in the Department of Finance (Treasuries & Accounts) of the State Government in the lower pay scale of Rs. 2000-3500/- and it was at his request that he was recommended for appointment as Treasury Officer by the appointing authority. Having accepted the offer of appointment as Treasury Officer, which was lower in scale as that of the post he was holding in the PUNTEX, respondent No. 1 could not claim the fixation of pay scale as was in the PUNTEX, because the only policy of the State Government was to protect the last pay drawn and not the pay scale.;