[Cites 3, Cited by 0]
Punjab-Haryana High Court
Manpreet Garg vs State Of Punjab And Others on 30 April, 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
133
CWP-13252-2026
Date of decision: 30.04.2026
Manpreet Garg .....Petitioner
Versus
State of Punjab and others .....Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAMIT KUMAR
Present : Mr. Ankush Thakral, Advocate for the petitioner.
****
NAMIT KUMAR, J. (ORAL)
1. The present petition has been filed by the petitioner under
Article 226 of the Constitution of India, claiming the following reliefs:-
"i. To issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of
mandamus directing the respondents to fix/re-fix the pay of
the petitioner in the regular statutory pay scale/pay matrix
applicable to the post of Patwari, i.e. Rs. 10,300-34,800
with Grade Pay of Rs. 3,200 along with all subsequent pay
revisions, with effect from the due date, and to make
necessary corrections in the iHRMS/service record of the
petitioner, along with all consequential benefits including
arrears and interest @ 12% per annum, in light of the law
laid down by this Hon'ble Court in CWP-15896 of 2023,
titled as 'Saurabh Sharma and others vs. State of Punjab
and another, which stands upheld upto the Hon'ble
Supreme Court of India.
ii. In the alternative and without prejudice to the aforesaid
prayers, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue
an appropriate writ, order directing the respondents, in
particular respondent no.4, to forthwith consider and
decide the representation dated 24.12.2025 (P-11)
submitted by the petitioner by passing a speaking order in
time bound manner, strictly in consonance with
consonance with instructions dated 05.01.2026 (P-13)
issued by respondent no.2 and the law laid down by this
Hon'ble Court in CWP-15896 of 2023 titled as 'Saurabh
Sharma and others vs. State of Punjab and others'.
Iii. With a further prayer that this Hon'ble Court may be
pleased to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of
mandamus declaring that the instructions dated
17.07.2020 (P-14) issued by the Finance Department are
not applicable to the case of the petitioner, inasmuch as
the petitioner was inducted into service prior to the
issuance of the said instructions and his service conditions
are governed by the statutory rules and pay structure as
per rules prevailing at the time of his
appointment/induction.
xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx"
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that for
redressal of his grievances, the petitioner has also made a
representation dated 24.12.2025 (Annexure P-11) to the respondents
which is still pending consideration. He further submits that at this
stage, the petitioner would be satisfied, if appropriate directions are
issued to the respondents to consider and decide the said representation,
by passing a speaking order, in a time bound manner.
3. Notice of motion.
4. On receipt of advance copy, Mr. Kanav Singla, AAG,
Punjab, accepts notice on behalf of the respondents. He has no
objection to the innocuous prayer made by learned counsel for the
petitioner.
5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone
through the record of the case.
6. Without going into the merits of the case at this stage, the
present petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent No.4 to
decide the representation dated 24.12.2025 (Annexure P-11) submitted
by the petitioner expeditiously, by passing a speaking order after
affording an opportunity of hearing to him, preferably within a period
of 04 months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.
Further, the decision taken thereon shall be conveyed to the petitioner.
30.04.2026 (NAMIT KUMAR)
Vinay JUDGE
Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No
Whether reportable : Yes/No
