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 1]

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Tejbir Singh & Others vs State Of Punjab And Others on 9 February, 2012

Author: Surya Kant

Bench: Surya Kant

       IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT
                      CHANDIGARH

                               Civl Writ Petition No.2318 of 2012
                               Date of Decision : February 09, 2012.

Tejbir Singh & others                                     .....Petitioners
       versus
State of Punjab and others                                .....Respondents

CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT.

Present : Mr.Pawan Kumar Goklaney, Advocate for the petitioners.
          Ms.Monica Chhibber Sharma, DAG, Punjab.
                     -.-

1. Whether Reporters of Local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?
2. To be referred to the Reporters or not?
3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?
                              ---

Surya Kant, J. (Oral)

Notice of motion.

Ms.Monica Chhibber Sharma, learned Deputy Advocate General, Punjab, accepts notice on behalf of the respondents.

Let six copies of the writ petition be supplied to the learned State counsel during the course of day failing which the order shall be automatically recalled and the writ petition shall be deemed to have been dismissed for non-prosecution.

In view of the nature of order which I propose to pass, there is no need to seek any counter-reply from the respondents at this stage.

The petitioners' claim is for the grant of pay scale of Rs.160- 400/- as admissible to the Class-III employees having qualification of matriculation and three years' Trade Certificate Course (including CWP No.2318 of 2012 [2] apprenticeship training/certificate) as they fall in Category-V of the Notification.

During the course of hearing, it transpires that the claim raised by the petitioners can be effectively considered in the light of the order dated 30.5.2008 passed by this Court in CWP No.10759 of 1990 (Rajinder Paul Gautam and others versus State of Punjab and others. Which stands upheld uptil the Hon'ble Supreme Court.

The writ petition is accordingly disposed of in terms of Rajinder Paul Gautam's case (supra) with a direction that the claim of the petitioners be also considered in the light of the said decision and if found entitled to, grant them the necessary relief within a period of four months from the date of receiving a certified copy of this order.

Ordered accordingly.

Dasti.

February 09, 2012                                     (SURYA KANT)
  Mohinder                                                JUDGE