1996 INSC 1666
                                        SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

                                                   State of Punjab

                                                           Vs.

                                                       Lal Singh

                                               C.A.No.15057 of 1996

                                   (K. Ramaswamy and G. B. Pattanaik, JJ.)

                                                      18.11.1996

                                                       ORDER

1. Delay condoned.

2. Leave granted.

3. We have heard learned counsel on both sides.

4. This appeal by special leave arises from the order of the Punjab and Haryana High Court, made
on November 2, 1995 in C.W.P. No. 16409/92. The controversy raised is for the advance
increment. In which scale of pay the respondents are entitled to advance increment is the question?
Admittedly, the respondents were appointed on substantive posts of JBT Teachers and they were
temporarily promoted as Head Teachers. The scale of pay for the JBT Teachers is Rs. 1200-2100/-.
They are discharging the duities temporarily as Head Teachers in the initial pay of Rs. 1410/-. They
claimed advance increment for discharging the duty as Head Teachers. The High Court has
construed that they are entitled to the advance increment as Head Teachers. Rule 4(4) of the Punjab
Civil Services Rules, Volume I, Part I which reads as under:

"4.4 The initial substantive pay of a Government employee who is appointed substantively to a
post on a time-scale of pay is regulated as follows:

(i) When appointment to the new post involves the assumption of duties or responsibilities of
greater importance (as interpreted for the purpose of Rule 4.13) than these attaching to such
permanent post, he will draw as initial pay the stage of the time-scale next above his substantive
pay in respect of the old post;"

5. A reading thereof would clearly indicate that initial substantive pay of a Government employee
who is appointed substantively to a post on a time-scale of pay, is regulated, if he holds a lien on a
permanent post, other than a tenure post and when appointment to the new post involves the
assumption of duities or responsibilities of greater importance, then he will draw as initial pay the
stage of the time scale next above his substantive pay in respect of the old post. Thus, it could be
seen that when JBT Teacher was appointed temporarily as a Head Teacher, he is entitled to draw,
since he is holding responsibilities of greater importance as a Head Teacher, one advance increment
in his old post in the time scale next above the substantive pay on the date of his temporarily
promotion as a Head Teacher.

6. The appeal is accordingly allowed. The order of the High Court stands modified. They are
entitled to one advance increment in the sale of JBT Teacher at the time of promotion while
discharging the duties as Head Teachers. No costs.

         Appeal allowed.