Punjab-Haryana High Court
Ramesh Devi And Ors vs State Of Punjab And Ors on 21 November, 2024
Author: Harsimran Singh Sethi
Bench: Harsimran Singh Sethi
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:153138
CWP-10789-2016 & connected cases 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
(209) CWP-10789-2016
Date of Decision : November 21, 2024
Prem Kumar and others .. Petitioners
Versus
State of Punjab and others .. Respondents
(2) CWP-11190-2016
Chet Ram and others .. Petitioners
Versus
State of Punjab and others .. Respondents
(3) CWP-24583-2015 (O&M)
Mulakh Raj and others .. Petitioners
Versus
State of Punjab and others .. Respondents
(4) CWP-13312-2018
Karamjit Kaur and others .. Petitioners
Versus
State of Punjab and others .. Respondents
(5) CWP-16748-2016
Amrik Singh and others .. Petitioners
Versus
State of Punjab and others .. Respondents
1 of 7
::: Downloaded on - 25-11-2024 09:38:04 :::
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:153138
CWP-10789-2016 & connected cases 2
(6) CWP-18396-2015
Amarjeet Miglani and others .. Petitioners
Versus
State of Punjab and others .. Respondents
(7) CWP-1830-2016
Amrik Chander and others .. Petitioners
Versus
State of Punjab and others .. Respondents
(8) CWP-2374-2016
Harinder Singh and others .. Petitioners
Versus
State of Punjab and others .. Respondents
(9) CWP-22507-2015
Ramesh Devi and others .. Petitioners
Versus
State of Punjab and others .. Respondents
(10) CWP-24584-2015
Manmohan Singh and others .. Petitioners
Versus
State of Punjab and others .. Respondents
(11) CWP-25541-2017
Sikander Singh and others .. Petitioners
Versus
State of Punjab and others .. Respondents
2 of 7
::: Downloaded on - 25-11-2024 09:38:05 :::
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:153138
CWP-10789-2016 & connected cases 3
(12) CWP-26172-2015
Krishan Lal and others .. Petitioners
Versus
State of Punjab and others .. Respondents
(13) CWP-26183-2015
Sat Pal and others .. Petitioners
Versus
State of Punjab and others .. Respondents
(14) CWP-26863-2015
Malkit Singh and others .. Petitioners
Versus
State of Punjab and others .. Respondents
(15) CWP-26905-2015
Santokh Singh and others .. Petitioners
Versus
State of Punjab and others .. Respondents
(16) CWP-4034-2024
Mohar Singh and others .. Petitioners
Versus
State of Punjab and others .. Respondents
(17) CWP-5620-2016
Gurjant Singh and others .. Petitioners
Versus
State of Punjab and others .. Respondents
3 of 7
::: Downloaded on - 25-11-2024 09:38:05 :::
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:153138
CWP-10789-2016 & connected cases 4
(18) CWP-8366-2015
Ram Parkash and others .. Petitioners
Versus
State of Punjab and others .. Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI
Present: Mr. Pawan Kumar Goklaney, Advocate and
Mr. Ashish Goklaney, Advocate, for the petitioners
in CWP-10789-2016 and CWP-11190-2016.
Mr. Sushil Saini, Advocate, for the petitioners
in CWP-24583-2015, CWP-24584-2015, CWP-26172-2015,
CWP-26183-2015, CWP-26863-2015, CWP-26905-2015 and
CWP-5620-2016.
Mr. Y.M. Bhagirath, Advocate, for the petitioners
in CWP-13312-2018, CWP-16748-2016, CWP-22507-2015
and CWP-8366-2015.
Mr. Sunny Singla, Advocate and
Ms. Riti Aggarwal, Advocate,
(joined through VC) and
Mr. Anil Rathore, Advocate, for the petitioners
in CWP-18396-2015, CWP-2374-2016, CWP-25541-2017
and CWP-1830-2016.
Mr. Nitesh Singla, Advocate, for the petitioners
in CWP-4034-2024.
Mr. Satnam Preet Singh, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab.
Mr. Jasbir Singh, Advocate, for respondent No.2
in CWP-25541-2017.
Mr. Jagraj Singh, Advocate, for
Mr. Vinish Singla, Advocate, for respondent No.5
in CWP-18396-2015.
HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI J. (ORAL)
1. By this common order, 18 writ petitions, the details of which
have been given in the heading, are being disposed of as all these petitions
involve the same question of law on similar facts.
4 of 7
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:153138
2. In the present bunch of petitions, the claim being raised by the
petitioners is that as they had been re-designated as Junior Assistant on
01.01.1996, the petitioners are entitled for the same benefit, as already has
been granted to the petitioners in CWP No.22422 of 2010 titled as Anil
Kumar and others vs. State of Punjab and others, decided on 16.05.2012,
which judgment has already been upheld in LPA No.1729 of 2012 and
further, SLP has also been dismissed though, the question of law has been
kept opened.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners
are not being given the benefit only on the ground that the petitioners in
these bunch of petitions were not party in Anil Kumar's case (supra).
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners further submits that an
anomaly has occurred as senior Junior Assistants have been denied the
benefit of the pay scale whereas the juniors to the petitioners, who were
party in Anil Kumar's case (supra), has already been granted the benefit of
the pay scale, which is causing prejudice to the petitioners hence, the
petitioners are also entitled for the benefit as given to the petitioner in Anil
Kumar's case (supra).
5. Learned counsel for the respondents has not been able to
differentiate that the petitioners in the present bunch of petitions are
similarly situated as Anil Kumar's case (supra).
6. Learned counsel for the respondents, on the instructions from
Ms. Jaswinder Kaur, Sr. Assistant and Mr. Harmanjit Singh, Sr. Assistant,
O/o DPI, Department of Education, Punjab, submits that the claim of all the
petitioners will be considered in terms of the judgment in Anil Kumar's
case (supra) and in case, they are found similarly situated as the petitioner
5 of 7
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:153138
in Anil Kumar's case (supra), the benefit extended to the petitioner in Anil
Kumar's case (supra), will also be extended to them.
7. Learned counsel for the respondents further submits that in
case, any of the petitioner is not similarly situated as petitioner in Anil
Kumar's case (supra), appropriate order will be passed regarding their
entitlement for the grant of pay scale as extended to the petitioner in Anil
Kumar's case (supra).
8. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
after the filing of the writ petitions, now on 29.08.2024, an order has been
passed by the respondents that any Junior Assistant, who was in place upto
19.05.1998, they are to be granted the benefit of pay scale of Rs.5000-
8100/- and while deciding the claim of the petitioners, who were designated
as Junior Assistant though after 01.01.1996 but before 19.05.1998 be also
considered in light of the said decision taken by the Government.
9. Learned State counsel submits that while considering the claim
of the petitioners, the letter dated 29.08.2024 will also be kept in mind and
in case, any petitioner is entitled for the benefit under the said letter dated
29.08.2024, will also be extended the benefit and appropriate order on the
claim of the petitioners will be passed qua their entitlement giving due
reasons within a period of eight weeks of the receipt of copy of this order.
10. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that keeping in
view the statement of learned counsel for the respondents, the present writ
petitions may kindly be disposed of having been not pressed any further.
11. Ordered accordingly.
6 of 7
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:153138
12. Civil miscellaneous application pending if any, also stands
disposed of.
13. A photocopy of this order be placed on the file of other
connected cases.
November 21, 2024 (HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI)
harsha JUDGE
Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No
Whether reportable : Yes/No
7 of 7
