101+224 HARYANA URBAN JALMED RAJ CORAM: Present: HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI, J. (Oral) CM-4973 documents. same are allowed. all just exceptions. LPA-1061 1. judgment/ CWP No. 4214 of 2018 titled Development Authority through its Chief Administrator and another”, IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CM-4973 LPA-1061 Date of Decision : HARYANA URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY VERSUS JALMED RAJ CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMARINDER SINGH GREWAL Mr. Arvind Seth, Advocate for the appellant. Mr. Avinit Awasthi, Advocate *** HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI, J. (Oral) 4973-LPA-2026 Present application has been filed to place on record certain documents. Keeping in view the contents mentioned in the application, the same are allowed. Annexure A-3 to Annexure A all just exceptions. 1061-2023 (O&M) In the present appeal, challenge is to the impugned judgment/order dated 22.03.2023 passed by the learned Single Judge in CWP No. 4214 of 2018 titled “Jalmed Raj vs. Haryana Urban Development Authority through its Chief Administrator and another”, IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 4973-4974-LPA-2026 in/and 1061-2023 (O&M) Date of Decision : 27.07.2026 DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY ........Appellant VERSUS ........Respondent HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI AMARINDER SINGH GREWAL for the appellant. , Advocate for the respondent. HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI, J. (Oral) Present application has been filed to place on record certain Keeping in view the contents mentioned in the application, the 3 to Annexure A-4 are taken on record, subject to In the present appeal, challenge is to the impugned order dated 22.03.2023 passed by the learned Single Judge in “Jalmed Raj vs. Haryana Urban Development Authority through its Chief Administrator and another”, Present application has been filed to place on record certain Keeping in view the contents mentioned in the application, the 4 are taken on record, subject to In the present appeal, challenge is to the impugned order dated 22.03.2023 passed by the learned Single Judge in “Jalmed Raj vs. Haryana Urban Development Authority through its Chief Administrator and another”, SAPNA GOYAL 2026.07.28 11:47 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CM-4973-4974-LPA-2026 in/and LPA-1061-2023 (O&M) -2- whereby the learned Single Judge granted the benefit of stepping up of pay to the respondent w.e.f. 01.12.1996 along with arrears and interest. 2. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant argues that till the respondent remained in service, respondent did not agitate any claim and even after respondent retired in the year 2015, respondent did not agitate the matter for a period of 03 years. Thereafter, respondent filed a writ petition claiming the benefit of stepping up of his pay w.e.f. 01.12.1996, which relief has been granted by the learned Single Judge vide the impugned judgment/order dated 22.03.2023 without appreciating the actual Rules governing the said benefit. 3. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that on the day when the respondent retired from service from the post of Assistant on 31.05.2015, the Haryana Civil Services (Assured Career Progression) Rules, 2008 (hereinafter referred to as the ACP Rules, 2008) were in operation and, according to Rule 12 of the ACP Rules, the respondent could not have granted the said benefit of stepping up of pay equivalent to a junior, as same was not admissible, which fact has been ignored by the learned Single Judge vide the impugned judgment/order dated 22.03.2023. 4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent submits that though the ACP Rules, 2008 were in existence at the time of retirement of respondent but subsequently, by way of an amendment of the ACP Rules in the year 2016, the benefit of stepping up of pay has been made admissible even to a promotee. Hence, the respondent intends to challenge the ACP Rules, 2008 to claim the said benefit and submits that he has no objection if the impugned judgment/order dated 22.03.2023 passed by the learned Single SAPNA GOYAL 2026.07.28 11:47 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CM-4973-4974-LPA-2026 in/and LPA-1061-2023 (O&M) -3- Judge is set aside but liberty is granted to the respondent to challenge the ACP Rules, 2008 to seek the appropriate relief to which he claims entitlement. 5. Keeping in view the above, the impugned judgment/order dated 22.03.2023 passed by the learned Single Judge, is set aside. 6. On the asking of the learned counsel for the respondent, the writ petition filed by respondent is allowed to be withdrawn with liberty to the respondent to file a fresh petition on the same cause of action by laying a challenge to the ACP Rules, 2008, in case the respondent so intends. 7. Pending application(s), if any shall stand disposed of. (HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI) JUDGE 27-07-2026 Sapna Goyal (AMARINDER SINGH GREWAL) JUDGE NOTE: Whether speaking/ reasoned: YES Whether reportable: NO SAPNA GOYAL 2026.07.28 11:47 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document