Urmila Kumari And Others vs State Of Punjab And Another

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Urmila Kumari And Others vs State Of Punjab And Another on 21 March, 2024

               CWP-3632-2024                           2024:PHHC:040790                      1

                                   IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA
                                              AT CHANDIGARH
               116
                                                                   CWP-3632-2024
                                                                   Date of decision: 21.03.2024

               Urmila Kumari and others
                                                                                       ....Petitioners
                                                       Versus

               State of Punjab and another
                                                                                      ...Respondents

               CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMAN CHAUDHARY
                                                 *****

Present : Mr. Vikas Chatrath, Advocate for the petitioners.

***** AMAN CHAUDHARY. J (ORAL).

1. The prayer in the present Civil Writ Petition filed under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India, is to issue a writ in the nature of mandamus, for directing the respondents to grant benefit of proficiency step up alongwith consequential benefits alongwith interest.

2. Learned counsel would submit that the respondents have not granted the benefit of proficiency step up to the petitioners after taking into account the service rendered by them in the Classic & Vernacular Pay Scale. The issue stands decided by this Court in CWP-16095-2012 titled as Baldev Singh and others vs. State of Punjab and others, on 16.05.2016, Annexure P-16, which stands implemented vide order dated 21.09.2017, Annexure P-18. In this regard, a legal notice dated 19.11.2022, Annexure P-17, has been served upon the respondents, which has yet not evoked any response. He thus, at this stage, on instructions, submits that the petitioners are sanguine of it being considered in a positive manner, in case, a direction is given to the respondents to decide the same in a time bound manner by granting them an opportunity of hearing.

HAMANT

3. Notice of motion.

I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment CWP-3632-2024 2024:PHHC:040790 2

4. At the asking of the Court, Mr. Satnam Preet Singh, DAG, Punjab accepts notice on behalf of the respondent-State and has no objection to the limited prayer made.

5. In view of the aforesaid and without commenting upon the merits of the case, this petition is hereby disposed of with a direction to the respondents to consider the legal notice dated 19.11.2022, Annexure P-17 and decide the same taking note of the aforesaid pleas, within a period of six months and if found entitled, necessary benefit be granted to them forthwith. However, in the eventuality of the relief being denied, a speaking order be passed, after associating the petitioners therewith.

                                                                     (AMAN CHAUDHARY)
                                                                          JUDGE
               21.03.2024
               Hemant

                                   Whether speaking/reasoned     :      Yes / No
                                   Whether reportable            :      Yes / No




HAMANT
2024.03.21 16:25
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this order/judgment