The Punjab and Haryana High Court has stayed the retrospective operation of an amendment to the state’s pay rules in a case that could have far-reaching implications for the Punjab Police constables recruited pursuant to the 2021 recruitment drive. The bench made it clear the question arising for determination was whether a pay scale already admissible to an employee could be taken away by a retrospective amendment to a rule so as to deprive him of crystallised rights.“In the present petition, the question which arises for determination is, whether by retrospective amendment to a rule, a pay scale which was admissible to an employee, who had already worked, can be taken away so as to take away the crystallised rights by the said retrospective amendment,” the division bench of Justice Harsimran Singh Sethi and Justice Amarinder Singh Grewal observed at the very onset.The bench also issued notice of motion for August 24 to the state and other respondents while taking up the petition filed by Pawandeep Kaur and 45 other Punjab Police constables. They were represented by senior advocate DS Patwalia and counsel Gauravjit Singh Patwalia.Pending further consideration, the bench ordered: “Till the next date of hearing, the amendment done vide notification dated August 5, 2025, as far as it operates retrospectively shall remain stayed.” The case will now be heard along with a similar matter.The bench, during the course of hearing, was told that the state had earlier issued instructions dated July 17, 2020, providing for a reduced pay scale to the employees working as Excise and Taxation Officer. The action was challenged on the ground that pay scale admissible to an employee under the statutory rules was required to be granted and the same could not be substituted by the issuance of instructions/notification.The bench also took note of the submission that a single judge had already granted interim relief while passing an order on July 6 in another matter. The bench had, in the process, relied upon the judgment in yet another case. The bench in that matter had directed the state on September 13, 2024, to release pay scales in accordance with the statutory rules. Counsel further submitted that the judgment had been upheld up to the Supreme Court and that even the review petition had been dismissed.It was added that the state, instead of implementing the judicial pronouncements, amended the rules governing the pay scale with retrospective effect so as to take away the petitioners’ rights for the grant of admissible pay scale.The bench also took note of the petitioners’ reference to a Supreme Court judgment to say that retrospective amendments to service rules might be legally permissible, but benefits already accrued to employees could not be withdrawn retrospectively.The order further records the petitioners’ submission that “the crystallised rights cannot be taken away by retrospective amendment and the same can only be done prospectively”.The petitioners had challenged the validity of the Government instructions dated July 17, 2020, and October 29, 2020, contending that they were contrary to the Punjab Police Rules and the Punjab Civil Services (Revised Pay) Rules applicable on the dates of the petitioners’ recruitment and joining. According to the petitioners, the impugned provisions, to the extent they prescribe different pay scales for employees performing identical duties solely on the basis of the date of recruitment, are discriminatory and liable to be quashed.The bench was told that a decision was unilaterally taken vide letter/instruction dated July 17, 2020, that any recruitment conducted “hereinafter” would be paid strictly as per the seventh Central Pay Commission scales. Thereafter, vide letter dated December 29, 2020, the starting salary of such freshly recruited constables was fixed at a consolidated amount of Rs 19, 900 per month.It was added that the state of Punjab issued Punjab Civil Services (Revised Pay) Rules, 2021, and the 6th Punjab pay scale was implemented for all categories of employees. However, employees’ appointment after July 17, 2020, were arbitrarily excluded.It was added that the amendment was carried out with the sole object of nullifying the effect of the high court judgement in case of “Saurabh Sharma and others vs State of Punjab and another” granting parity to similarly situated Government employees. The petitioners argued that there was no intelligible differentia to justify such classification solely on the basis of the date of recruitment and that the distinction violated Articles 14 of the Constitution.