Citation : 2024 Latest Caselaw 8326 P&H
Judgement Date : 20 April, 2024
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:053283
CWP-18350-1998 (O&M) 2024:PHHC:053283
-1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
207
WP-18350-1998 (O&M)
C
Date of decision: 20.04.2024
Ram Lal
....Petitioner
Versus
State of Punjab and another
...Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMAN CHAUDHARY ***** Present : Mr. Sunny Singla, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. Swapan Shorey, DAG, Punjab.
***** AMAN CHAUDHARY. J (Oral) 1. The prayer in the present petition is for directing the
respondents to pay to the petitioner the salary for the post of clerk against
which he had been discharging his duties.
2. Learned counsel would contend that the petitioner was
appointedbytheDepartmentalSelectionCommitteetothepostofStoreBoy,
aClassIVpost,inthepayscaleofRs.325-495videordersdated31.10.1981
and in the same year, he was assigned duties of higher post of clerk.
However,salaryforthatpostwasnotgrantedtohimagainstwhichhefinally
cametobepromotedon14.12.2016,AnnexureP-14. Nodecisionregarding
it has beentakenbythedepartmentinthespeakingorderdated23.11.2012,
Annexure P-9 and even previously vide order dated 05.08.1999, Annexure
R-1, it had been observed that regarding giving salary to the petitioner for
working against clerical seat, shall be considered later on. His entitlement
stems from the judgments in Selvaraj vs. Lt. Governor of Island, Port
Blair,1998(4)RSJ22;Smt.P.Grovervs.StateofHaryanaandanother,
(1983) 4 SCC 291; OmParkashandothersvs.TheStateofPunjaband
1 of 2
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:053283 CWP-18350-1998 (O&M) 2024:PHHC:053283 -2- others, 2003(4) SLR 100; Darshan Singh vs. State of Punjab,
CWP-4552-2003, decided on 01.07.2010; Sukhraj Singh and others vs.
StateofPunjabandanother,CWP-9125-2014,decidedon09.01.2018,and
Gurjant Singh and others vs. State of Haryana and others,
CWP-26598-2015,decidedon12.03.2020.He,oninstructions,praysthatthe
petitioner would be satisfied, in case a time bound directionisgiventothe
respondents to consider his claim, keeping in view the aforesaid judgments.
3. Learned State counsel has no objection to the limited prayer
made.
4. Inwakeoftheaforesaidandwithoutcommentingonthemerits
of the case, this petition is hereby disposed of with a direction to the
respondentstoconsideranddecidetheclaimofthepetitionerwithinaperiod
of 6 months, by taking into account the aforesaid submissions as also the
judgments relied upon, which this Court has no reason to believe the
authorities would not address in a just, fair and reasonable manner. Upon
doing so after notice and hearing offered to him and if found entitled,
notional benefits be granted forthwith. Needless to say, if the orders are
adversetohisinterest,thesameshallcontainreasonsandthepetitionershall
be free to seek legal redress.
(AMAN CHAUDHARY) JUDGE 2 0.04.2024 Hemant
hether speaking/reasoned W : es / No Y Whether reportable : Yes / No
2 of 2
Publish Your Article
Campus Ambassador
Media Partner
Campus Buzz
LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026
LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!