← Library
High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCWP/29323/2019disposed of

Partap Chand v. Punjab State Power Corporation Limited And Others

2019-10-14Mr. Justice Harsimran Singh Sethi3 pages

-1-

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH Date of decision: - 14.10.2019 Partap Chand ....Petitioner

Versus

Punjab State Power Corporation Limited and others .....Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI Present:- None for the petitioner.

**** HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI , J. (ORAL) In the present writ petition, the challenge by the petitioner is to the impugned order dated 27.06.2018 (Annexure P-8) by which claim of the petitioner for the grant of promotional increment after 23 years of service has been rejected.

As per the averments made in the writ petition, though the case of the petitioner was rejected in June, 2018, but subsequently the respondents had issued a Clarification for the grant of promotional increment on 21.08.2018. Further, another Clarification was issued by the respondents on 01.10.2018 and keeping in view both the Clarifications which have been given by the respondents themselves for the release of 23 years promotional increment on 21.08.2018 and 01.10.2018, the petitioner is eligible for the grant of the said benefit i.e. promotional increment after 23 years service.

-2From the pleadings it transpires that keeping in view the Clarifications issued by the Government dated 21.08.2018 as well as dated 01.10.2018, the respondents are liable to be directed to reconsider the case of the petitioner for the grant of the benefit ignoring the impugned order by which his claim has been rejected by the respondents. Notice of motion.

On the asking of the Court, Mr. Chetan Goyal, Advocate, accepts notice on behalf of the respondents-PSPCL and states that the respondent-Corporation will consider the case of the petitioner afresh in view of the Clarifications dated 21.08.2018 and 01.10.2018 and fresh order will be passed in respect of the claim of the petitioner for the grant of promotional increment after rendering 23 years of service. Counsel for the respondents further states while passing the fresh order, the impugned order already rejecting the claim of the petitioner dated 27.06.2018 (Annexure P-8) will be ignored and fresh consideration will be done keeping in view the order passed by this Court on 29.11.2018 in CWP No. 1013 of 2017 titled as 'Balvir Singh Vs. PSPCL and another' and other connected cases, Interest of justice will be served, at this stage, in case the present writ petition is disposed of in terms of order passed by this Court in Balvir Singh's case (supra), subject to the condition that the impugned order already passed will be ignored at the time of the consideration.

Keeping in view the above, the present writ petition is disposed of with the direction to the respondents to consider the case of

-3the petitioner afresh as undertaken by counsel for the respondents and appropriate order shall be passed keeping in view the directions given by this Court in CWP No. 1013 of 2017 titled as 'Balvir Singh Vs. PSPCL and another' and other connected cases, decided on 29.11.2018. ( HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI ) October 14, 2019 JUDGE naresh.k Whether reasoned/speaking?

Yes Whether reportable?

No