High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCWP/16968/2015disposed of

Jai Pal Singh And ORS v. State Of Punjab And ORS

2015-08-18Mr. Justice Darshan Singh2 pages

CWP No.16968 of 2015 -1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP No.16968 of 2015 Date of Decision: 18.08.2015 Jai Pal Singh and others ... Petitioners

Versus

The State of Punjab and others ... Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV NARAIN RAINA

Present:

Mr. I.D. Singla, Advocate, for the petitioners.

1. To be referred to the Reporters or not?

2. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? RAJIV NARAIN RAINA, J.

This petition has been filed seeking a mandamus to the State to grant higher pay scales by way of scale to scale revision w.e.f. January 01, 2006.

This court faulted the action of the Government in reducing the pay scale of Junior Assistants from Rs.5000-8100 to Rs.4400-7000 and upheld the higher pay scale in CWP # 22422 of 2010 (P-3). The higher scale was made applicable from January 01, 1996. The LPA # 1729 of 2012 (P-4) against the decision of the learned Single Judge was dimissed. Presently, the dispute is that the petitioners have not been given the further scale to scale revision w.e.f. January 01, 2006. The State appears to deny the claim on the ground that the scale has not been generalized.

The petitioners have filed a representation dated June 11, 2015 (P-5) addressed to R-3 but the same has not been decided. MANJU 2015.08.21 14:47 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document High Court Chandigarh

CWP No.16968 of 2015 -2Mr. I.D. Singla, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners says on instructions that he would be satisfied if a direction is issued to the respondents to consider and decide the aforesaid representation within a time bound manner.

The request is fair and reasonable.

A direction is issued to the respondents to consider and decide the aforesaid representation within three months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. In case, the claim of the petitioners is found justified, no hearing would be required. If it is otherwise, then the petitioners would be heard and speaking order would be passed within the time frame fixed above.

The petition stands disposed of with the above directions. (RAJIV NARAIN RAINA) JUDGE 18.08.2015 manju MANJU 2015.08.21 14:47 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document High Court Chandigarh