Punjab-Haryana High Court
Nishant Poonia And Another vs State Of Punjab And Others on 4 September, 2023
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:115878-DB
CWP No. 19525 of 2023 -1-
Neutral Citation No. 2023:PHHC:115878-DB
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
CWP No. 19525 of 2023 (O&M)
Date of decision : 04.09.2023
Nishant Poonia and another .. Petitioners
versus
State of Punjab and others .. Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK SIBAL
HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SUKHVINDER KAUR
Present: Mr. Nikhil Anand, Advocate, for the petitioners.
Mr. R. S. Pandher, Senior Deputy Advocate General, Punjab.
DEEPAK SIBAL, J.
(1) Through the present petition, the petitioners seek quashing of
notification and circular dated 15.01.2015 (Annexure P-2 and P-3) and notification
dated 22.12.2015 (Annexure P-4) through which the State has directed that in the
case of new recruits like the petitioners shall be paid minimum basic salary of a
pay band (without Grade Pay) as also without any annual increment or allowances
except travel allowances and that on confirmation of these employees the period
prior to their confirmation shall not be treated as regular service. The petitioners
further prays for issuance of directions to the State to release arrears of full salary
to them from the date of their appointment till the date of completion of their
probation in the applicable pay scale (along with Grade Pay), annual increments
and all other allowances etc.
(2) At the outset, learned counsel for the petitioners contends that the case
of the petitioners is fully covered in their favour by a recent judgment of a Division
1 of 3
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:115878-DB
Neutral Citation No. 2023:PHHC:115878-DB
Bench of this Court dated 16.02.2023 passed in a bunch of petitions in which the
lead case was CWP No. 17064 of 2017- Ajay Kumar Singla and others vs.
State of Punjab and others.
(3) Learned State counsel very fairly does not deny the above assertion.
(4) In the light of the above, the present petition is also allowed in terms
of the directions as given in Ajay Kumar Singla's case (supra) which are as
follows:-
(a) Notification No.7/204/2012-4FP1/60 dt.15.01.2015
having already been quashed in Gurwinder Singh and
others (1 supra) and Dr. Vishavdeep Singh and others (4
Supra), there is no need to quash it again;
(b) Clarification No.7/204/2012-4FP.1/166 dt.15.01.2015
and notification GSR.3/Const/Article 309/AMD.(5)/ 2015
dt.22.12.2015 to the extent they held that during period of
probation or if increase in such period of probation, only
fixed emoluments shall be paid to the employee, which
shall be equal to the minimum of pay band of the service or
post to which he is appointed and shall not include Grade
Pay, Special Pay, Annual Increment or any other allowance
except Travelling Allowance AND further directing that the
period of probation shall not be treated to be the time spent
on the time scale applicable to his post, are quashed;
(c) Any conditions included in appointment letters issued to
petitioners on the basis of the above notifications, are also
quashed;
(d) The respondents are directed to grant to the petitioners
the regular pay scale along with all other emoluments,
allowances etc. from the date of their initial appointment
and pay the arrears within three months from today;
2 of 3
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:115878-DB
Neutral Citation No. 2023:PHHC:115878-DB
(e) The respondents are directed to count the period spent
on probation as regular services for the purpose of
determination of the total length of service under the
Service Rules.
(f) The validity of the notification No.
GSR.56/Const./Art.309/ AMD.(18)/2016 dt.05.09.2016
issued by the State of Punjab is left open for consideration
in an appropriate case.
(5) No costs.
(Deepak Sibal)
Judge
04.09.2023 (Sukhvinder Kaur)
vs Judge
Whether speaking/ reasoned : Yes/No
Whether reportable : Yes/No
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:115878-DB
3 of 3
