Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Punjab and Haryana · body

2025 DAILYLAW 110451 (PNJ)

SUKHDEV SINGH v. STATE OF HARYANA AND ANTOHER

CWP/35247/2024 · 2025-05-22

Vinod S Bhardwaj

Special Leave Petitionbody2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 109 CWP-35247-2024 Date of decision: 22.05.2025 SUKHDEV SINGH ......Petitioner VERSUS STATE OF HARYANA AND ANOTHER .......Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD S. BHARDWAJ ***** Present: - Mr. Arun Kumar Goyat, Advocate for the petitioner. ***** VINOD S. BHARDWAJ, J. (Oral) Prayer made in the present writ petition is for directing the respondents to grant the benefit of 1 increment and all other consequential benefits with arrears in completion of more than 06 months of service as per the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court of India dated 11.04.2023 in the matter of the “Director (Admn. And HR) KPTCL versus C.P. Mundinamani”, 2023 INSC 352 as well as the Division Bench Judgment of this Court in the matter of “Suresh Kumar Singla versus State of Haryana”. 2. Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner contends that the issue has already been decided by a Division Bench of this Court in a batch of writ petitions including CWP-14627 2024 titled “Mahabir Singh Tanwar versus State of Haryana and others”. VISHAL SHARMA 2025.05.27 11:03 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-35247-2024 -2- 3. Learned State Counsel is not in a position to controvert the adjudication by a Division Bench but he submits that the issues are pending before the Hon’ble Supreme Court in respect to the same issue. 4. Be that as it may, since the judgment has been passed by a Division Bench of this Court after taking into consideration all the issues and even after noticing the pending SLPs before the Hon’ble Supreme Court, vide its judgment dated 24.04.2025, the present writ petition is disposed of in terms of with a direction to the respondents to consider the instant writ petition as a representation and to take a decision thereupon in light thereof and after noticing any other instructions/orders that have been so passed by the respondent-authorities. 5. Needful be done within a period of three months of a receipt of certified copy of this order. The admissible benefits, if any, be released within a further period of two months. (VINOD S. BHARDWAJ) MAY 22, 2025 JUDGE Vishal Sharma Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether Reportable : Yes/No VISHAL SHARMA 2025.05.27 11:03 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document