Harinder Kaur vs State of Punjab

Sabina, J.—This petition has been filed by the petitioner challenging orders dated 8.8.1990 (Annexure P-5) and 29.4.1994 (Annexure P-8).

Case of the petitioner, in brief, is that she had joined the respondent-University on 12.8.1885 and at that time, she was possessing Doctorate Degree (for short Ph.D. degree). Respondent No. 3 forwarded a request to respondent No. 1 for granting approval for three/one increment as the case may be to the Assistant Professors, who possessed Ph.D. degree and had joined the university on or after 12.1.1988. Respondent No. 1 granted approval for release of three/one advance increment as the case may be from 12.1.1988 vide impugned letter dated 8.8.1990 (Annexure P-5). As per the said letter Assistant Professors, who had joined the university before 12.1.1988, were not granted the benefit of advance increment. Petitioner filed numerous representations to the respondents claiming relief as was granted in CWP No. 17894 of 1991 (copy of the judgment has been attached as Annexure P-6). However, vide impugned order dated 29.4.1994 (Annexure P-8), the representation filed by the petitioner was rejected. Hence, the present petition.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the case of the petitioner was squarely covered by the decision given by this Court in CWP No. 17894 of 1991 (Annexure P-6).

Learned counsel for the respondents, on the other hand, have opposed the petition and have submitted that the petitioner had joined the university on 12.8.1985, whereas, vide Annexure P-6, relief had been granted to Ravinder Singh Saini and others w.e.f. 1.1.1986. Therefore, the case of the petitioner was not covered by the decision given by this Court in CWP No. 17894 of 1991.

In the present case, admittedly, petitioner had joined the respondent-University on 12.8.1985. Petitioner was already having Ph.D. degree at the time of her joining the service with the University. A perusal of Annexure P-6 reveals that in the said case, petitioners had joined the university on or after 1.1.1986 but before 12.1.1988. The said petitioners had been denied the benefit of advance increments on the ground that they had joined the university before the cut off date i.e. 12.1.1988. While allowing the writ petition vide Annexure P-6, this Court held that by disallowing the benefit of advance increments to the Assistant Professors, who had joined on or after 1.1.1986 but before 12.1.1988 amounts to hostile discrimination. There was no plausible explanation for fixing the cut off date and allowing only those professors advance increments, who had joined the post on or after 12.1.1988. The operative portion of the order reads as under:-

In view of what has been stated above, Annexure P-5 is quashed and a direction is issued to the respondents to give advance increments to the petitioners who are admitted to be holding Ph.D. degree. The arrears be paid within three months from today. If the arrears are not paid incur an interest of 12% per annum. There shall be no order as to costs.

In the present case, petitioner was already holding Ph.D. degree at the time of joining of her service with the respondents. The argument raised by learned counsel for the respondents that the petitioner had joined before 1.1.1986 and therefore, his case was not covered by the decision given by this Court vide Annexure P-6 is without any force and is liable to be rejected. The case of the petitioner is fully covered by the decision given by this Court in CWP No. 17894 of 1991. Since letter Annexure P-5 stands already quashed vide order Annexure P-6, this petition is liable to be allowed.

Accordingly, this petition is allowed. Impugned orders dated 8.8.1990 (Annexure P-5) and 29.4.1994 (Annexure P-8) are quashed and respondents are directed to release advance increment to the petitioner, who is admittedly holding a Ph.D. degree and the arrears be released to the petitioner within three months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. In case the arrears are not paid within the stipulated period, petitioner would be entitled to receive interest thereon @ 12% per annum from the date of passing of this order till realisation.