Balbir Ram v. State Of Punjab And Others

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH Date of decision: 27.05.2026 Balbir Ram ....Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab and others

...Respondents

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARPREET SINGH BRAR

Present:

Mr. Navinderjit Singh Dandiwal, Advocate for the petitioner.

Ms. Pratibha Bali, AAG, Punjab.

Mr. Dharminder Singh Randhawa, Advocate for respondent No.4.

**** HARPREET SINGH BRAR, J. (ORAL) 1.

The present Civil Writ Petition has been filed under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India seeking issuance of an appropriate writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to grant the benefit of annual increments for the years 2017 and 2018, which have been illegally and wrongfully withheld despite the order dated 18.03.2025 (Annexure P-2) passed by the Additional Chief Secretary, whereby the punishment of stoppage of four annual increments with cumulative effect was reduced to stoppage of two annual increments with cumulative effect.

2.

Learned counsel for the petitioner, inter alia, contends that the petitioner was facing departmental proceedings on the eve of his retirement. The statutory appeal filed by the petitioner was allowed and the punishment order was modified from withholding four annual increments to withholding two annual increments. Despite this, the petitioner has been granted the benefit of only one increment, as discernible from Annexure P-5. The petitioner submitted a representation dated 11.08.2025 seeking the benefit in terms of the order passed by the Appellate Authority on 18.03.2025 (Annexure P-2). However, the same has remained unheeded.

3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has limited his prayer to the extent that the present petition be treated as a comprehensive representation and the same be decided in a time bound manner by passing a speaking order after affording the petitioner an opportunity of being heard. 4.

Notice of motion.

5.

Ms. Pratibha Bali, AAG, Punjab put in appearance and accept notice on behalf of for respondent-State. Mr. Dharminder Singh Randhawa, Advocate put in appearance and filed memorandum of appearance on behalf of respondent No.4, which is taken on record. Registry is directed to place the same at an appropriate place.

6.

Learned counsel for the respondents submits that the grievance raised by the petitioner in the present writ petition would be considered by

passing a speaking order in accordance with the law by respondent(s)/competent authority.

7.

Therefore, in view of the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties, the present writ petition is disposed of and the respondent No.3/competent authority is directed to treat this writ petition as a comprehensive representation and consider the claim of the petitioner in light of order passed by the Appellate Authority on 18.03.2025, Annexure P-2, and pass a speaking order after affording him an opportunity to be heard, within a period of 03 months from the date of receiving a certified copy of this order. Further, the decision taken thereof shall be conveyed to the petitioner. Needless to say, if the petitioner is found entitled to the relief sought, the same shall be granted forthwith by the respondents.

8.

Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall also stand disposed of.

(HARPREET SINGH BRAR) JUDGE 27.05.2026 parul verma Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes/No Whether reportable :

Yes/No