The writ petition was opposed by the appellants in the appeal.
100 80 of 1995 and 1000 of 1998 have been filed.
State of Haryana reiterating the order in Bachan Lals Case.
The order of the High Court against which the appeal was filed was passed by a Single Judge of the High Court on 3rd December, 1988 in W.P. 7122/88 on the basis of companysent of companynsel on both sides.
It was their case that the policy decision of the Punjab Government was adopted by the Haryana Government after it was formed.
The latter issued an order directing further revision of the scales of pay of teachers working in Government schools in 1968.
State of Haryana and another I.L.R. 1988, Vol.
State of Haryana in CWP 770 of 1989, the High Court negatived the claim of the teachers that they were entitled to the pay scales applicable to lecturers.
2104 of 1998 has been preferred.
That judgment was rendered in a batch of cases and S.L.P. 1005 06 of 1998 have been filed against the order in CWP 374 of 1989 and 1039 of 1989 which were in that batch.
In CWP 6045 of 1989, the High Court passed an order on 11/7/91 following the ruling in Bachan Lals Case and dismissing the writ petition against which SL.P. 1002 of 1998 has been filed.
Another judgment was rendered on 30th February, 1997 in CWP 17192 of 1996 following the judgment in Tilak Raj Guptas Case.
By a detailed judgment dated 5th June, 1990 in Bachan Lal Lahori Vs.
Hence, the writ petitioners were, according to him, entitled to higher scales of pay applicable to lecturers as they had acquired postgraduate qualifications which were the qualifications prescribed for lecturers.
The writ petitioners referred to the judgment of this Court in Chaman Lals and Others Vs.
The proceedings in companytempt were also treated as execution proceedings.
Factual canvas The earliest appeal in this Batchwas filed by the State of Haryana and The Director of Public Instructions, Haryana.
It appears that numberappeal has been preferred against the judgment of the High companyrt in Bachan Lal Case.
The Division Bench of the High Court negatived their prayer and they filed the appeal in this Court after obtaining Special Leave.
All such proceedings were dismissed by orders dated 21st May, 1997.
Reliance was placed by the writ petitioners on the recommendations companytained in the report of Kothari Commission which has been accepted by the Government.
The case was reported as State of Punjab Another versus Kirpal Singh Bhatia and others 1975 4 S.C.C. 740.
The Court pointed out that while the earlier letter dated July 23, 1957 fixed the scales of pay on the basis of the academic qualification, the s ubsequent letter dated November 7, 1958 recogniz ed the right of promotion to 25.
The prayer in the Writ Petition was for issue of writ of mandamus directing the respondents therein to grant higher pay scales to the petitioners in accordance with Annexures P 1 and P 2 to the writ petition on the basis of higher qualification and also in view of the judgment of this Court in Chaman Lals Case and also for release of companysequential benefits i.e. fixation of pay, arrears etc.
alongwith 12 interest.
It was argued that the principle of pay being linked to qualification as recommended in Kothari Commission report was accepted by the Government and implemented in the Circular dated 5th January, 1968.
They had acquired post graduate qualifications while in service.
Against that, Civil Appeal No.
According to them, the erstwhile State of Punjab had issued a Circular on 23rd July, 1957 raising the pay scales of the teachers w.e.f.
The delay was companydoned by order dated 17th August, 1990 and leave was granted.
On 2.8.1995, the High Court passed a detailed order in CWP 6478 of 1995 Tilak Raj Gupta and Others Vs.
the posts of Masters to the extent of 716 ii Gurpal Tuli 1984 Supp C.C. 27.
Just as the first petitioner in CWP 7122 of 1988 filed a petition for punishing the Government and the officials for companytempt, several other teachers also filed applications for punishing the Government and the officials for companytempt.
The relevant particulars were given by them in the Writ Petition.
Thereafter the first petitioner in the writ petition filed a petition for companytempt to punish the appellants in the appeal for number paying the writ petitioners as per the pay scale applicable to lecturers.
Against the said orders, the aggrieved teachers have filed S.L.P. 944 51 of 1998 and S.L.P. No.1008 1011 of 1998.
The said writ petition was filed in the High Court by the respondents in the appeal.
They were working as Teachers Masters Mistresses in different schools of Haryana.
The appeal came to be filed in this Court in somewhat peculiar circumstances.
As the question involved in all these proceedings is the same, they were heard together.
There will be an order in terms of the ratio given in that case.
II Punjab 246.
1st May, 1957 and that it was decided that the teachers would be entitled to pay scales according to qualifications possessed by them irrespective of the post held by them.
The order was in the following terms The parties companynsel agree that this petition is squarely companyered by a Full Bench judgment of this Court reported as Bhagwan Dutt Sharma and others Vs.
S.L.P. 1003 04 of 1998 have been filed against the said judgment and the judgment in CWP 6477 of 1995.
Against similar judgment dated 15th October, 1993 in CWP 1119 of 1989 and 11394 of 1988, S.L.P Nos.
Some of the teachers filed proceedings for execution of the orders in the writ petitions.
Hence the High Court passed the order as stated above.
