Punjab-Haryana High Court
Rajinder Kumar And Another vs State Of Punjab And Others on 21 March, 2024
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:040755
CWP No.6850 of 2024 (O&M) 1
2024:PHHC:040755
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
CWP No.6850 of 2024 (O&M)
Date of decision: 21.03.2024
Rajinder Kumar Garg and another
....Petitioners
Versus
State of Punjab and another
....Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAMIT KUMAR
Present: Mr. M.S. Uppal, Advocate
for the petitioners.
NAMIT KUMAR J. (Oral)
1. Prayer in this writ petition filed under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India is for issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus
directing the respondents to grant the benefit of Assured Career
Progression Scheme (ACP Scheme) as formulated vide Policy Circular
dated 03.11.2006 (Annexure P-6) as have been granted to the counter
parts of the petitioner by the State of Punjab on the basis of the order
passed by this Court in CWP No.16446 of 2010, titled as "Jaswinder
Singh Bedi and others vs State of Punjab and others" (Annexure P-1),
which has been upheld by this Court in LPA No.244 of 2014 vide order
dated 19.12.2014 (Annexure P-2) and the petitioners be granted all the
benefits along with consequential benefits and interest @ 18% per
annum from the date of its accrual till its actual realization.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the
petitioners are entitled for the relief as granted vide judgment dated
20.05.2013, which has been rendered by this Court in CWP No.16446
1 of 3
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:040755
2024:PHHC:040755
of 2010, titled as "Jaswinder Singh Bedi and others vs. State of
Punjab and others", decided on 20.05.2013. Learned counsel for the
petitioners further submits that the benefit of Jaswinder Singh Bedi's
case (supra) has not been extended to the petitioners on the ground that
no order has been passed by the competent Court of law granting the
petitioners the same benefit as granted to the petitioners in Jaswinder
Singh Bedi's case (supra).
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners argues that keeping in
view the law settled by the Division Bench of this Court in "Satbir
Singh Vs. State of Haryana", 2002(2) SCT 354, once the question of
law has been settled, all the similarly situated employees are entitled for
the benefit without forcing them to approach this Court.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that for the
relief which has been sought in the present writ petition, the petitioners
have already approached the respondents by serving a legal notice dated
19.12.2023 (Annexure P-9), which is still pending consideration with
the authorities and the petitioners will be satisfied, at this stage, in case
a time bound direction is issued to respondent No.1 to decide the same
by passing an appropriate speaking order, in accordance with law.
5. Notice of motion.
6. Mr. Rajesh Sehgal, Addl. A.G., Punjab, accepts notice on
behalf of respondent No.1 while Mr. Rakesh Roy, Advocate for Mr.
Abhilaksh Gaind, Advocate, has appeared on behalf of respondent No.2.
7. Learned counsel for the State as well as learned counsel for
respondent No.2 submits that the legal notice, which is indeed pending
2 of 3
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:040755
2024:PHHC:040755
consideration with the authorities, shall be considered and decided in
the stipulated time as granted by this Court.
8. In view of the above, without expressing any opinion on
the merits of the case or the claim being made by the petitioners,
respondent No.2 is directed to decide the legal notice dated 19.12.2023
(Annexure P-9), by passing a speaking order within a period of 06
weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. In case
after the decision, it is found that the petitioners are entitled for any
monetary benefit, the same shall also be released to them within a
period of next 03 months.
9. Present writ petition stands disposed of.
(NAMIT KUMAR)
JUDGE
21.03.2024
yakub
Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No
Whether reportable: Yes/No
3 of 3
