Punjab-Haryana High Court
Kailash Chand Gupta And Ors vs State Of Haryana Etc on 22 September, 2022
CWP-8819-2017 along with connected petitions 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
Sr. No.219 Date of Decision: 22.09.2022
1) CWP-8819-2017
Kailash Chand Gupta and others .... Petitioners
Versus
State of Haryana and others ... Respondents
2) CWP-11507-2017
A.S.Malhotra and others .... Petitioners
Versus
State of Haryana and another ... Respondents
3) CWP-15189-2017
Mehtab Singh Rahar and others .... Petitioners
Versus
State of Haryana and another ... Respondents
4) CWP-15843-2017
L.S.Yadav and others .... Petitioners
Versus
State of Haryana and another ... Respondents
5) CWP-20215-2017
S.R.Madan and others .... Petitioners
Versus
State of Haryana and another ... Respondents
6) CWP-12970-2017
Harnek Singh and others .... Petitioners
Versus
State of Haryana and another ... Respondents
1 of 4
::: Downloaded on - 29-09-2022 23:42:04 :::
CWP-8819-2017 along with connected petitions 2
7) CWP-5085-2018
G.S.Panjeta and others .... Petitioners
Versus
State of Haryana and another ... Respondents
8) CWP-6788-2019
K.C.Chaudhary and others .... Petitioners
Versus
State of Haryana and another ... Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI
Present: Mr. R.K.Malik, Sr. Advocate with
Mr. Sachmeet Singh Randhawa, Advocate
for the petitioners in CWP-8819-2017.
Mr. K.L.Arora, Advocate
for the petitioners in CWP-11507-2017 and CWP-12970-2017.
Mr. Ranjit Saini, Advocate
for the petitioners in CWP-15189-2017, CWP-15843-2017,
CWP-20215-2017, CWP-5085-2018 and CWP-6788-2019.
Mr. S.S.Mann, Addl. A.G.Haryana.
Mr. Parth Goyal, Advocate for
Mr. Anurag Goyal, Advocate
for respondent No.4.
Mr. Vikrant Attri, Advocate for
Mr. Dhiraj Chawla, Advocate
for respondent No.5 in CWP-8819-2017.
***
HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI, J. (ORAL)
By this common order, all the writ petitions, the details of
which have been mentioned in the heading, are being disposed of as all of
them involve similar question of law.
Learned Senior counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners
argues that the Haryana State Adhayapak Sangh, which is a body of the
2 of 4
CWP-8819-2017 along with connected petitions 3
teachers working in aided institution, had filed a writ petition bearing
CWP No.7945 of 1997 which was decided on 09.12.1999, wherein the
teachers of the aided institution claimed the benefits such as medical
allowance, bonus, LTC as well as leave encashment and the State was
directed to frame a policy but no policy has been framed so far despite
expiry of approximately two decades. Learned counsels appearing for the
petitioners submits that the petitioners intend to approach the respondents
for the implementation of the said judgment so that the retired employees of
the aided institutions should also be given the said benefits.
Learned Senior counsel further submits that as of now, the
serving teachers, who are working in the aided institutions, have been
granted the benefit of medical allowance but the same is yet to be granted to
the retired employees, hence, once a benefit has been given to a serving
teacher, the same needs to be extended to him/her after the retirement also
because the medical treatment is essential and becomes a part of life with the
increase of age.
Learned counsel for the petitioners further submit that similar
benefits also exist with regard to the various autonomous bodies of the
Haryana, which have been given to the retired employees.
Learned counsel for the petitioners submit that as the petitioners
intend to approach the respondents by filing an appropriate representation
claiming that he benefits be extended to the retired employees of aided
institutions also and the respondents be directed to decide the same
sympathetically in a time bound manner.
Learned State counsel submits that in case any representation is
filed by the petitioners raising the aforesaid claim, the same will be
3 of 4
CWP-8819-2017 along with connected petitions 4
considered in accordance with law and appropriate order on the prayer of the
petitioners will be passed within a period of 8 weeks from the receipt of any
such representation.
Learned counsel for the petitioners submit that keeping in view
the aforesaid statement of learned State counsel, the present petitions may
kindly be disposed of as having been not pressed any further with liberty to
the petitioners to approach the respondents by filing appropriate
representation.
Ordered accordingly.
A photocopy of this order be placed on the connected files.
(HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI)
JUDGE
22.09.2022
Maninder
Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No
Whether reportable : Yes/No
4 of 4
