- (1.) Sukhwinder Kaur is working as Sewing Teacher in Government Girls Higher Secondary School, Kapurthala. Earlier she was appointed against a leave vacancy and her services were terminated. When permanent vacancy occurred, she was again appointed on 24.12.1980. Vide Annexure P-4 dated 27.1.1981 passed by the District Education Officer, Kapurthala, the petitioner was ordered to be adjusted in the grade of Rs. 570-1080. This order was passed in response to an enquiry made by Headmaster, Government High School, Talwandi District Kapurthala as the grade was not mentioned in the order of appointment. Subsequently the petitioner's services were regularised, vide order Annexure P-7 dated 12.6.1986. However, the grade of 480-880 was mentioned in this order for Sewing Teachers. The petitioner submitted representation, copy Annexure P-8, for adjustment in the grade of Rs. 570-1080. She also submitted another representation. Ultimately, order Annexure P-10 was passed by the District Education Officer addressed to the Principal of the school, which is dated 24.9.1986, mentioning therein that the petitioner was to have the grade of Rs. 480-880. However, she was wrongly allowed the grade of Rs. 570-1080. The grade of Sewing Teacher with effect from 1.1.1978 was to be fixed at Rs. 480-880. In this petition, the petitioner challenges order Annexures P-5 and P-10 whereby it was directed that the petitioner should be fixed in the scale of Rs. 480-880 instead of Rs. 570-1080. Challenge is also to the order Annexure P-7 wherein she was accordingly fixed in the grade of Rs. 480-880.
(2.) Similar matter came up for consideration in this Court in Civil Writ Petition No. 1416 of 1981 Smt. Santosh Kumari v. The State of Punjab and others, decided on 25-2-1982, operative portion of which reads as under :- "The grievance made is that whereas the pay scale of all other persons holding the same posts have been revised in her case no such revision has been made. The pleas raised in the petition have not been controverted. Mr. Sayal appearing on behalf of the State of Punjab states that she was only Middle pass whereas the basic qualification for the said post was Matric. But this fact hardly makes any difference as far as the decision of this case is concerned because once the qualification has been relaxed and the petitioner has been appointed as a Sewing Teachress she was entitled to have equality of treatment in matters relating to service including the revised grade of pay. We, therefore, allow this petition and direct the respondent to fix the pay of the petitioner in the same grade in which the other Sewing Teachresses are drawing their salaries. The salary in the new grade shall be fixed positively within two months from today." Again the matter was considered by this Court in Civil Writ Petition No. 2743 of 1980, Shrimati Amarjit Kaur v. State of Punjab and others, decided by M.R. Agnihotri, J. on 22.2.1988 after relying upon the decision in Santosh Kumari's case . It was held that the Tailoring Mistresses were entitled to be fixed in the revised grade of Classical and Vernacular Teachers of Rs. 570-1080. Another argument was also noticed, which also arises in the present case as to whether, after allowing the revised pay-scale, the same could be withdrawn by the authority or not. Reference was made to the case of M.L. Chopra v. Union of India, 1967 SLR 588 and it was observed as under :- "In that case, certain revised pay scale was allowed to the petitioner who was a Railway Guard but later on, on reconsideration of the matter, the Railway authorities withdrew the same. R.S. Narula, J. as his Lordship then was, quashed the order of withdrawal of the pay scale. When another exercise was attempted later on after giving notice etc. and the Railway authorities again decided to withdraw the benefit of Higher grade, the Division Bench consisting of D.K. Mahajan and B.S. Dhillon, JJ., upheld the judgment of the learned Single Judge (1967 S.L.R. 588) add placing reliance on the aforesaid Privy Council judgment, reiterated the legal position in The General Manager, Northern Railway, Baroda House, New Delhi and another v. Madan Lal Chopra, Luggage Guard, Northern Railway and others,1971 1 SLR 629."
(3.) Learned counsel for the respondents has argued that Tailoring Mistresses under the instructions from the Finance Department of the Government could not be allowed the grade of Rs. 570-1080. This contention cannot be accepted as the matter has already been considered by this Court in two decisions referred to above.;