Sushil Kumar And Others v. State Of Punjab And Others

CWP-13631-2024 (O&M)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH CWP-13631-2024 (O&M) Date of Decision : 27.08.2024 Sushil Kumar and others .. Petitioners

Versus

State of Punjab and others .. Respondents

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI

Present:

Mr. Krishan Singh Dadwal, Advocate with Ms. Neha Jain, Advocate for the petitioners.

Mr. T.P.S. Chawla, Sr. DAG, Punjab.

**** HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI J. (ORAL) 1.

On the last date of hearing, the following order was passed :- "Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that in the present petition, stand of the respondents while passing the impugned orders is that the revision of pay scale which was granted to the petitioners in the year 2011 was prospective revision of the pay scale and did not amount to correction of the anomaly, which has arisen while granting the pay scale w.e.f. 01.01.2006.

Learned counsel for the petitioners further submits that once, the pay scale which was granted in the year 2011 has been made applicable from 01.01.2006, the stand of the respondents that the pay scale was prospective in nature is incorrect as only the arrears of revision was not given hence, the impugned orders have been passed on wrong presumption SATYAWAN 2024.08.28 17:24 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CWP-13631-2024 (O&M) that in the year 2011 only the pay scale granted to the cadre of the petitioners in 2006 was further revised rather than removing the anomaly. Notice of motion for 27.08.2024. Notice reg: stay as well."

2.

Learned counsel for the respondent-State, on instructions from Chander Mohan, Sr. Assistant, O/o Director, Department of Horticulture, Punjab, submits that the impugned order be treated as withdrawn with a liberty to pass a fresh order in accordance with law within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order and in case it is found feasible to accept the claim of the petitioners the same will be extended to them, otherwise due reasons for not accepting the claim of the petitioners will be mentioned in the speaking order so passed, which will be conveyed to the petitioners.

3.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that keeping in view the statement of the learned counsel for the respondents, as the impugned order has been withdrawn, the present petition may kindly be disposed of having been not pressed any further. 4.

Ordered accordingly.

27.08.2024 (HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI) Satyawan JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes / No Whether reportable : Yes / No SATYAWAN 2024.08.28 17:24 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document