Commissioner, Municipal Corporation, Pathankot v. Sunil Kumar And Others

2024:PHHC:029798-DB












































































IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

Letters Patent Appeal No.475 of 2023 (O&M) Date of Decision:



  

  



The Commissioner, Municipal Corporation, Pathankot .....Appellant versus Sunil Kumar and others .....Respondents
 

  




Nagar Council, Dhanaula, Barnala .....Appellant versus Jitpal Singh and others .....Respondents  

  



The Commissioner, Municipal Corporation, Pathankot .....Appellant versus Baldev Singh and others .....Respondents  

   



The Commissioner, Municipal Corporation, Amritsar .....Appellant versus Dev Raj and others .....Respondents  

  



The Commissioner, Municipal Corporation, Amritsar .....Appellant versus Harpreet Singh and others .....Respondents  

  



The Commissioner, Municipal Corporation, Amritsar .....Appellant versus Lakhwinder Singh and others .....Respondents  

  



The Commissioner, Municipal Corporation, Amritsar .....Appellant versus Vijay Kumar and others .....Respondents

 

  



The Commissioner, Municipal Corporation, Amritsar .....Appellant versus Vijay Kumar and others .....Respondents

2024:PHHC:029798-DB












































































 

  



The Commissioner, Municipal Corporation, Amritsar .....Appellant versus Khushwinder Singh and others .....Respondents  

  



The Commissioner, Municipal Corporation, Amritsar .....Appellant versus Kulwant Singh and others .....Respondents  

  




The Commissioner, Municipal Corporation, Amritsar .....Appellant versus Dharminder Singh and others .....Respondents 
 

  



The Commissioner, Municipal Corporation, Amritsar .....Appellant versus Tarsem Singh and others .....Respondents  

  



The Commissioner, Municipal Corporation, Amritsar .....Appellant versus Nagendra Parshad and others .....Respondents  

  



Municipal Corporation, SAS Nagar, Mohali ....Appellant

Versus

Lakhwinder Singh and others .....Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE G.S.SANDHAWALIA, ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE LAPITA BANERJI, JUDGE Present :

Mr. Sanjeev Soni, Advocate and Mr. Sarthak Soni, Advocate, for the appellants. Mr. Savreet Singh Brar, Advocate with Mr. Ajay Jain, Advocate, for the appellant in LPA=204=2023. None for the appellant in LPA No. 994 of 2023. Mr. Jasbir Singh Mohri, Advocate, for respondent No.1 in LPA Nos. 497, 500, 501, 503, 513, 514, 517, 520, 531 and 534 of 2023.

Mr. Salil Sabhlok, Sr. Deputy Advocate General, Punjab. ****

2024:PHHC:029798-DB












































































!!"#$%&'(% '#%)*+,!(%') 

This order shall dispose of all the Letters Patent Appeals as the common question of law and facts involved in the same. The facts are taken from Letters Patent Appeal No. 475 of 2023 (The Commissioner, Municipal Corporation, Pathankot vs. Sunil Kumar and others). 2.

The present Letters Patent Appeals seek consideration of the order dated 20.02.2023 passed by the learned Single Judge in Civil Writ Petition No. 26858 of 2017 which was decided along with a bunch of cases being lead case (Heera Singh vs. State of Punjab and others). The said view was thereafter followed by the same learned Single Judge on 27.02.2023 wherein he decided bunch of 12 cases lead cases of which was Civil Writ Petition No. 27000 of 2017 (Tarsem Singh vs. State of Punjab and others). In LPA No. 204 of 2003 reliance was placed upon pendency of LPA No. 666 of 2022 while notice of motion was issued.

3.

In principle, the learned Single Judge by first judgment dated 20.02.2023 allowed a bunch of 19 writ petitions granted the benefits to the employees by holding that they were entitled to be governed by the Old Pension Rules and the Contributory Pension Fund Scheme would not be applicable to them. The said judgment was primarily based on the judgment passed by a Coordinate Bench of this Court in Harbans Lal vs. State of Punjab and others 2012(3) SCT 362 which was upheld by the Apex Court in Special Leave Petition No. 23578 of 2012 on 04.11.2015. The net result was that by counting the daily wage services towards qualifying service for pension and after on account of getting regularization the employees were held to be entitled for the benefits granted prior to 01.01.2004.

2024:PHHC:029798-DB












































































4.

The judgment rendered in Civil Writ Petition No. 26858 of 2017 (Heera Singh vs. State of Punjab and others) was the subject matter in Letters Patent Appeal No. 509 of 2023 Commissioner, Municipal Corporation, Amritsar vs. Heera Singh and others which was disposed of in terms of the orders passed in Letters Patent Appeal No. 666 of 2022 (Municipal Corporation, Qadian vs. Musthaq Masih and others) decided on 21.12.2023. The judgment rendered in Municipal Corporation, Qadian vs. Musthaq Masih and others was accordingly upheld by Justice Ritu Bahri, the then Acting Chief Justice of this Court on 21.12.2023 and also being the original author of the judgment delivered in Harbans Lal vs. State of Punjab and others (supra). 5.

The consequent judgment rendered by the learned Single Judge in Civil Writ Petition No. 27000 of 2017 (Tarsem Singh vs. State of Punjab and others) out of which 11 other appeals arise out is also based on the facts of the judgment rendered in Civil Writ Petition No. 26858 of 2017 (Heera Singh vs. State of Punjab and others), which as noticed above has already been upheld. 6.

In view of the above facts and circumstances, we do not find any ground as such to interfere in the judgment rendered by the learned Single Judge. Accordingly, the appeals filed by the appellants stand dismissed. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of. A copy of this order be placed in the connected files. (G.S.SANDHAWALIA) ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE (LAPITA BANERJI) JUDGE 29.02.2024 ravinder Whether speaking/reasoned √Yes/No Whether reportable √Yes/No