SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1996 Supreme(SC) 166

K.RAMASWAMY, G.B.PATTANAIK
State Of Punjab – Appellant
Versus
Dharam Paul – Respondent


JUDGMENT

Pattanaik, J.-Leave granted.

2. These appeals by the State of Punjab are directed against the judgment of the Division Bench of the Punjab High Court which dismissed the Letters Patent Appeal in limini and comfirmed the order of the learned Single Judge. The question that arises for consideration is whether the respondents are entitled to the relief of getting their pay step up and made equal to the pay drawn by other instructors irrespective of the trade in which they are working. The respondents filed Writ Petitions in the High Court of Punjab and Haryana alleging that even though they possess the same qualification and were appointed as instructors and were continuing as such, but with effect from 4.1.1961, pay scales of instructors in respect of 8 trades were changed whereas the respondents pay scales have not been changed. In the subsequent pay revision even though there has been no distinction but yet those group of persons who were drawing a higher scale of pay on the basis of their trades continue to get the same higher pay even though they are juniors to respondents and, therefore, the respondents should be entitled to get their pay by way of stepping up. The





Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top