Prtc Patiala vs Pritam Singh Etc
2024 Latest Caselaw 7464 P&H

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Prtc Patiala vs Pritam Singh Etc on 8 April, 2024

                                  Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:047449



                                                      2024:PHHC:047449

      IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
                     CHANDIGARH

131
                                            RSA-1723-1993 (O&M)
                                            Date of decision : 08.04.2024

Pepsu Road Transport Corporation, Patiala                    ....Appellant

                                V/S

Pritam Singh and another                                    ....Respondents

CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAMIT KUMAR

Present:    Mr. Anupam Singla, Advocate for the appellant.

            None for the respondents.

                                ****

NAMIT KUMAR, J. (ORAL)

1. As per office report, notice issued to respondent No.1 has

been received back unserved with the report that neither any such

person is working in the said office nor such person has retired from the

said office and notice issued to respondent No.2 has been duly served,

however, none has put in appearance on his behalf.

2. The appellant has filed the instant regular second appeal

against the judgment and decree dated 21.04.1993 passed by the learned

Additional District Judge, Patiala, whereby the judgment and decree

dated 17.02.1989 passed by the learned Sub Judge Ist Class, Patiala has

been reversed and the suit filed by respondent No.1/plaintiff claiming

the benefit of daily wage service from 15.06.1971 to 20.03.1972;

21.03.1972 to 30.06.1972 and 01.07.1972 to 15.09.1972 has been

ordered to be counted for the purpose of seniority.

1 of 2

Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:047449

2024:PHHC:047449

3. During the course of hearing, learned counsel representing

the appellant submits that the impugned judgment dated 21.04.1993

passed by the lower Appellate Court has since been implemented as no

stay was granted by this Court. The matter is pending after admission

since 1993. He further submits that Pritam Singh (respondent No.1) has

already been given seniority in terms of impugned judgment dated

21.04.1993. It is also not disputed that respondent No.1 has been retired

from service. He further submits that nothing further survives in the

present appeal and the same may kindly be disposed of as having been

rendered infructuous.

4. Ordered accordingly.

08.04.2024                                           (NAMIT KUMAR)
kothiyal                                                JUDGE

             Whether speaking/reasoned:              Yes/No
             Whether Reportable:                     Yes/No




                                 2 of 2