Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 2, Cited by 2]

Supreme Court - Daily Orders

Charanjit Singh vs State Of Punjab . on 13 January, 2015

Bench: Dipak Misra, Prafulla C. Pant

  ITEM NO.1                              COURT NO.6                SECTION IVB

                               S U P R E M E C O U R T O F      I N D I A
                                       RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

  Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C)                  No(s).   39188/2012

  (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 14/08/2012
  in LPA No. 270/2012 and CWP No. 16380/1989 passed by the High
  Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh)

  CHARANJIT SINGH & ORS.                                             Petitioner(s)

                                                 VERSUS

  STATE OF PUNJAB & ORS.                                             Respondent(s)

  (With Appln.(s) for directions exemption from filing O.T.,
  exemption from filing O.T., and interim relief and Office Report)
  (For Final Disposal)

  WITH
  SLP(C) No. 422/2013
  (With   appln.(s)   for deletion  of  proforma  respondents  and
  permission to place addl. documents on record and Interim Relief
  and Office Report)

   SLP(C) No. 8688/2013
  (With Interim Relief and Office Report)

   SLP(C) No. 13747/2014
  (With Office Report)

   SLP(C) No. 23783/2014
  (With Office Report)


  Date : 13/01/2015 This petition was called on for hearing today.


  CORAM :                HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DIPAK MISRA
                         HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRAFULLA C. PANT

  For Petitioner(s)                Mr.   M.L. Verma, Adv.
                                   Mr.   Amit Pawan, AOR
                                   Mr.   Shailendra Kumar, Adv.
                                   Mr.   Suryodaya Prakash Tiwari, Adv.
Signature Not Verified

Digitally signed by
Gulshan Kumar Arora
Date: 2015.01.19
16:44:45 IST
                                   Mr. S. K. Sabharwal,Adv.
Reason:


                                   Mr. P.N. Puri, Adv.
                                   Mr. Amit Chopra, Adv.
                                   Mr. Dhiraj, Adv.
For Petitioner(s)   Mr. R.K. Kapoor, Adv.
                    Ms. Rekha Giri, Adv.
                    Mr. Anis Ahmed Khan, AOR

For Respondent(s)   Mr. Nikhil Nayyar, AAG
                    Mr. Kuldip Singh, AOR

                    Mr. Jagjit Singh Chhabra,Adv.


          UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
                             O R D E R

Heard Mr. M.L. Verma, learned senior counsel along with Mr. Amit Pawan, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. Nikhil Nayyar, learned Addl. Advocate General for the State.

Having heard learned counsel for the parties at length, we are not inclined to interfere with the order passed by the High Court and, accordingly, the same stands affirmed. Be it stated, in course of hearing, Mr. Nayyar has invited our attention to the judgment dated August 30, 2010 passed by the Division Bench of the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh in CWP No.14634 of 2009 titled as Beant Singh & Ors. vs. State of Punjab & Ors. and other connected matters wherein the constitutional validity of the Punjab Pay Scale of Teachers Act, 2004 was called in question and the High Court has treated it to be intra vires. We have not adverted to the validity/correctness/soundness of the said judgment as that is not the subject matter of the present special leave petitions. We may hasten to add that when we say that we have not dealt with the validity/correctness/soundness of the judgment passed by the High Court while dealing with the constitutional validity, it only means that this Court has not addressed to the said lis, that is, the constitutional validity of the Act.

We may, however, add that any amount that has been paid to the respondents till today shall not be recovered. We have said so by way of abundant caution, as a submission has been canvassed by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the State Government has been paying the amount during the pendency of the special leave petition. Be that as it may, we have only said that there will be no recovery and that does not remotely suggest that the State Government would pay the amount, if not paid.

The special leave petitions are accordingly dismissed.

    (Gulshan Kumar Arora)                      (Sneh Lata Sharma)
        Court Master                              Court Master