Neelam Kangharia vs State of H.P. and Others

Kurian Joseph, C.J.—The writ petition is filed with the following prayers:

(i) That the respondents No. 1 to 3 be directed to pay to the applicant arrears/salary at par with that given to Govt. school teachers w.e.f. the date on which it was given to the other teachers as directed by the Hon''ble Supreme Court in the above mentioned judgment.

(ii) That the respondent No. 3 be directed to explain why the applicant has not been paid salary at par with the Govt. teachers and how the record pertaining to the date of joining of the applicant as mentioned as maintained in his office has wrongly shown her date of joining as 1.9.1995 instead of 8.9.1986 and to take appropriate action against the persons responsible for the mistake/tampering of records.

Placing reliance on a judgment of the Supreme Court in State of H.P. Vs. H.P. State Recognised and Aided Schools Managing Committees and Others, and on Annexures A-2, A-6 and A-10, it is submitted that the petitioner is entitled to get the benefit, particularly since the State itself has treated similarly situated persons for Grant-in-Aid. The petitioner may file a fresh representation before the first respondent within a month from today, in which case the appropriate action in the light of the decision, referred to above, Annexures A-2, A-6 and A-10 and other precedents will be taken in the case of the petitioner also within another four months. Consequential benefits, if any, shall also be disbursed to the petitioner within another one month.

The writ petition is disposed of, so also the pending applications, if any.