Take notes as you read a judgment using our Virtual Legal Assistant and get email alerts whenever a new judgment matches your query (Query Alert Service). Try out our Premium Member Services -- Sign up today and get free trial for one month.
Punjab-Haryana High Court
Surinderpal Singh vs State Of Punjab on 15 May, 2024
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:068377
CWP-9210-20
2001 -1--
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
334 CWP
CWP-9210-2001
Date of Decision: 15.05.2024
Surinderpal Singh ...Petitioner
Versus
State of Punjab and others ...Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAGMOHAN BANSAL
Present:- Ms. Alka Chatrath, Advocate with
Mr. Nikhil Singh, Advocate for petitioner
Mr. Pawan Kumar, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab
***
JAGMOHAN BANSAL, J. (Oral)
1. The petitioner through instant petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India is seeking direction to respondents to consider him for cash award on account of his participation in anti anti-terrorist operations.
2. The petitioner claims that he joined Punjab Police as Constable (Driver). During militancy in the State of Punjab, he was driver of jurisdictional Senior Superintendent of Police. Many anti anti-terrorists terrorists operations took place during his service service tenure and he was part of few operations. He was paid a meager sum of ₹500/- for one operation and ₹150/- for another operation.
3. Ms. Alka Chatrath, Advocate submits that petitioner was paid a petty amount despite his participation in the anti anti-terrorist terrorist operations. The 1 of 2 ::: Downloaded on - 16-05-2024 07:34:23 ::: Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:068377 CWP-9210-20 2001 -2--
other officers were handsomely paid. She, She relying upon judgment dated 24.04.2003 of this Court in Pal Singh v. State of Punjab and others,, CWP No.9180 of 2001, 2001 submits that respondents should reconsider his claim for cash award.
4. Mr. Pawan Kumar, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab submits that petitioner was a Driver and he never actively participated in anti anti-terrorist terrorist operations. Accordingly, he was paid out of award money. On being confronted with judgment of this Court in Pal Singh (supra),, he fairly concedes that competent authority would re-examine examine claim of petitioner qua cash award, if he has not been granted benefit benefit of promotion.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner agrees to the aforesaid arrangement.
6. In the wake of statement of both sides, the present petition stands disposed of with a direction to respondents to consider claim of petitioner for cash award in terms t of judgment of this Court in Pal Singh (Supra). The needful shall be done within 6 months from today.
7. It is made clear that petitioner shall not be entitled to any cash award, if at any time he was extended benefit of promotion.
(JAGMOHAN BANSAL) JUDGE 15.05.2024 Mohit Kumar Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No 2 of 2 ::: Downloaded on - 16-05-2024 07:34:24 :::