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 1, Cited by 7]

Supreme Court - Daily Orders

Narbadi Devi & Ors. Etc. vs State Of Haryana & Ors. Etc. on 22 August, 2014

         ITEM NO.40                 COURT NO.9                  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).
         20531-20565/2014

         (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 26/03/2014
         in RFA No. 2563/2013,26/03/2014 in RFA No. 2116/2013,26/03/2014 in
         RFA No. 2111/2013,26/03/2014 in RFA No. 4157/2011,26/03/2014 in
         RFA No. 1544/2011,26/03/2014 in CRO No. 62/2012,26/03/2014 in RFA
         No. 484/2011,26/03/2014 in RFA No. 2122/2013,26/03/2014 in RFA No.
         2117/2013,26/03/2014 in RFA No. 128/2011,26/03/2014 in RFA No.
         124/2011,26/03/2014 in RFA No. 2562/2013,26/03/2014 in RFA No.
         920/2012,26/03/2014 in RFA No. 2118/2013,26/03/2014 in RFA No.
         114/2011,26/03/2014 in RFA No. 127/2011,26/03/2014 in RFA No.
         2121/2013,26/03/2014 in RFA No. 2110/2013,26/03/2014 in RFA No.
         2120/2013,26/03/2014 in RFA No. 2115/2013,26/03/2014 in RFA No.
         2113/2013,26/03/2014 in RFA No. 125/2011,26/03/2014 in RFA No.
         129/2011,26/03/2014 in RFA No. 5657/2010,26/03/2014 in RFA No.
         487/2011,26/03/2014 in RFA No. 1592/2011,26/03/2014 in RFA No.
         1593/2011,26/03/2014 in RFA No. 2878/2011,26/03/2014 in RFA No.
         133/2011,26/03/2014 in RFA No. 485/2011,26/03/2014 in RFA No.
         174/2011,26/03/2014 in RFA No. 2119/2013,26/03/2014 in RFA No.
         4533/2011,26/03/2014 in RFA No. 1535/2011,26/03/2014 in RFA No.
         1594/2011,26/03/2014 in RFA No. 486/2011 passed by the High Court
         Of Punjab & Haryana At Chandigarh)

         NARBADI DEVI & ORS. ETC.                                Petitioner(s)

                                            VERSUS

         STATE OF HARYANA & ORS. ETC.                            Respondent(s)

         (with appln. (s) for deletion of proforma respondents and office
         report)

         WITH
         SLP(C) No. 21223-21230/2014
         (With Office Report)

         SLP(C) No. 22202-22216/2014
         (With Office Report)

         Date : 22/08/2014 These petitions were called on for hearing
         today.
Signature Not Verified

Digitally signed by
         CORAM :
Deepak Mansukhani
Date: 2014.09.04
14:29:30 IST
Reason:
                         HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J. CHELAMESWAR
                         HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. SIKRI
For Petitioner(s)     Mr. Manoj Swarup, Adv.
                      Mr. Karan Kapoor, Adv.
                      Mr. Rohit Kumar Singh ,Adv.

                      Mr.   Dinesh Kumar Garg ,Adv.
                      Mr.   Abhishek Garg, Adv.
                      Mr.   Dhananjay Garg, Adv.
                      Mr.   Deepak Mishra, Adv.

For Respondent(s)     Mr. Narender Hooda, Sr. Adv.
                      Mr. Ramesh Shokeen, Adv.

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

Appln(s) for deletition of petitioner/proforma respondents is allowed.

Issue notice.

Mr. Narender Hooda, learned senior counsel appearing for the respondents in all the matters states that he is ready to argue the matters finally. Even learned counsel for the petitioner in all the matters is ready to make the submissions on the merits of the case.

From the impugned judgment of the High Court, it transpires that the High Court has followed the judgment of this Court in Asharfi and others Vs. State of Haryana and others 2013(5) SCC 527 and has given increase at the rate of 12%. This was the demand of the petitioners herein which has been accepted following the ratio in Asharfi case(supra). To the extent there is no quarrel. However, it is pointed out by the learned counsel for the petitioner that in Asharfi case(supra), yearly increase of 12% was granted cumulatively and not at flat rate. This position as contained in Asharfi case (supra) could not be disputed by Mr. Narender Hooda, learned senior counsel for the State. Accordingly, the order of the High Court is modified to the extent that the 12% increase granted by the High Court shall be worked out on cumulative basis.

The special leave petitions stand disposed of accordingly.



(DEEPAK MANSUKHANI)                        (INDU BALA KAPUR)
 COURT MASTER                                COURT MASTER