Surinder Singh v. Union Of India And Others

CWP-9507-2026

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

CWP-9507-2026 DATE OF DECISION: 20.04.2026 SURINDER SINGH ... Petitioner

Versus

UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS ... Respondents

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK MANCHANDA

Present:

Mr. Adish Jain, Advocate for the petitioner.

**** HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI , J. (ORAL) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that though the petitioner is claiming reinstatement and the same has not been granted by the Central Administrative Tribunal (for short - the 'Tribunal') and therefore, the respondents are also liable to be directed to grant the reinstatement from the date when the services of the petitioner were terminated i.e., the year 2011. 2.

We have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and have gone through the record with his able assistance.

3.

It may be noticed that the petitioner's services were terminated, which was challenged by filing Original Application (for short - 'OA') No.212/PB/2012 which was dismissed by the Tribunal on 07.01.2013. The said dismissal was challenged by the petitioner in CWP-12232-2013, wherein the claim was only restricted to the grant of minimum pay scale. The petitioner further filed OA and the said benefit was also denied by the Tribunal on 02.08.2013. Thereafter, in another writ petition bearing CWP-21803-2013 liberty was given to the petitioner to file a fresh original application claiming the benefit of equal pay for the period the petitioner had worked. The said OA has been allowed by the Tribunal but KUMARI SAPNA 2026.04.22 18.33 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CWP-9507-2026 aggrieved by the fact that benefit of reinstatement has not been granted, the present petition has been filed.

4.

It may be noticed that at no given point of time, in the last 11 years, no benefit with regard to reinstatement though claimed, has been given to the petitioner by this Court, the only liberty by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court given was to seek parity in the pay scale for the post on which the petitioner was working keeping in view the duties already discharged prior to the termination. Once the said liberty was given by the Court under which the benefit of parity in pay has been granted, claiming reinstatement was not even in question either before this Court or the Tribunal, hence no ground is made out for any interference by this Court.

5.

The present petition stands dismissed.

(HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI) JUDGE (DEEPAK MANCHANDA) 20.04.2026 JUDGE sapna adhikari Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes Whether reportable :

No KUMARI SAPNA 2026.04.22 18.33 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document