High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCWP/22173/2013dismissed

Neelam Rani & ORS v. State Of Punjab & ANR

2016-12-23Mr. Justice S.P. Bangarh2 pages

CWP 22173 of 2013

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH Date of decision:23/12/2016 Neelam Rani (Retd.) and others ............Petitioner vs State of Punjab and others .............Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE JASWANT SINGH Present:- Mr.Vikas Chatrath,Advocate for the petitioners Mz.Sudeepti Sharma,DAG Punjab assisted by Mr.Ravinder Singh,Sr.Asstt., o/o DPI(SE)Punjab Jaswant Singh,J(Oral) Petitioners belong to C&V category and claim to be redesignated as Language Teachers w.e.f. 17.2.1989(P-2) whereby their pay scale was also equated with Masters. They have continued parity in the pay scales with Masters in the revised Pay Scales w.e.f. 1.1.1996 and 1.1.2006. Their grievance is that they have been denied parity of pay scales w.e.f. 1.12.2011 which has subsequently been accepted by the Finance Department while issuing clarification dated 30.9.2016.

The claim is now for directing the respondents to implement the decision at P-11. Vide order dated 6.12.2016, notice of motion was issued. Subsequently, on 20.12.2016, learned State counsel submitted that petition has become infructuous as the decision at P-11 has been implemented and payments made to petitioners. She,however, prayed for a day's time to file affidavit of the official concerned.

At the time of hearing today,though no affidavit, as noticed above, has been filed, but State counsel on instructions again submits that Rajinder Parshad Joshi 2016.12.24 12:55 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CWP 22173 of 2013 present writ petition has become infructuous as the decision at P-11 has been implemented and payments made to the petitioners. In view of the statement made by the learned State counsel, counsel for the petitioners agrees that no further adjudication in the matter is required as the petition has become infructuous. Accordingly,present writ petition is disposed of as having become infructuous with the observation that in case the needful has still not been done, the petitioners would be at liberty to revive the petition. 23.12.2016 (Jaswant Singh) joshi Judge Whether speaking/ reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable:

Yes/No Rajinder Parshad Joshi 2016.12.24 12:55 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document