Union Of India And Others vs Ramesh Chand And Others
2026 Latest Caselaw 5076 P&H

Citation : 2026 Latest Caselaw 5076 P&H
Judgement Date : 22 May, 2026

[Cites 2, Cited by 0]

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Union Of India And Others vs Ramesh Chand And Others on 22 May, 2026

Author: Harsimran Singh Sethi

Bench: Harsimran Singh Sethi

                       CWP-16361-2026                                      1

                       113


                                 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
                                              AT CHANDIGARH

                                                       CWP-16361-2026
                                                       Date of decision : 22.05.2026

                       Union of India and others                    ...Petitioner

                                                       Vs.

                       Ramesh Chand and others                      ...Respondent(s)

                       CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI
                                     HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK MANCHANDA

                       Present:      Ms. Bhavana Datta, Advocate
                                     for the petitioners.
                                            ***

                       HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI, J.(Oral)

1. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the benefit has

been granted by the Tribunal to the respondents based upon the judgment

passed in OA-3204-2011 titled as "Madhu Sudan and others Vs. Union of

India and others", which is incorrectly granted.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioners argued that the petitioners

never raised any grievance and therefore, now allowing the benefit of the

judgment in Madhu Sudan (supra) is incorrect.

3. We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and have

gone through the record with her able assistance.

4. As per settled principle of law, once the question of law has been

settled, the same should apply on all, rather than forcing every one to approach

the Court to claim the same. A bare reading of the order passed by Hon'ble

Central Administrative Tribunal would show that the benefit has been granted

authenticity of this order and

to the respondents being similarly situated as original applicant in Madhu

Sudan (supra). Once, the benefit claimed has been granted by the competent

Court of law to the similarly situated employees and has been upheld by the

Hon'ble Supreme Court of India, the same extends not only to the party of the

said proceedings but even to those who are similarly situated. As per the settled

principle of law settled by the Supreme Court of India in LT.Col.Suprita

Chandel Vs. Union of India and others, 2022. The relevant paragraph from

the judgment is reproduced hereunder:-

"14. It is a well settled principle of law that where a citizen aggrieved by an action of the government department has approached the Court and obtained a declaration of law in his/her favour, others similarly situated ought to be extended the benefit without the need for them to go to Court."

5. In the present case, though the challenge has been raised, but on

being asked to point out any differentiating fact between the respondents herein

and the applicant in Madhu Sudan, learned counsel for the petitioners was

unable to point out any differentiating facts.

6. In the absence of any differentiating facts, the relief granted to the

respondents based upon the relief granted to the similarly situated employees in

case of Madhu Sudan (supra), cannot be treated as arbitrary and rather, the

Union of India should have granted the same relief to the respondents without

forcing the respondents to seek the remedy by approaching this Court.

7. No other argument raised.

8. Hence, keeping in view of the above, no ground is made out for

interference as the order passed by the authorities has not been able to prove