CWP-10327 of 1999(O&M)and CWP-8475-2000(O&M) 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP-10327 of 1999(O&M) Date of decision : January 16, 2025 Gurmeet Singh and others ...... Petitioners Versus State of Punjab and others ...... Respondents CWP-8475 of 2000 (O&M) Amar Singh Chahal and others ...... Petitioners Versus State of Punjab and others ...... Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAGMOHAN BANSAL *** Present :-Mr. R. K. Malik, Senior Advocate with Mr. Sandeep Dhull, Advocate for the petitioners in both the cases. Mr. Aman Dhir, DAG., Punjab. Mr. Gaurav Jagota, Advocate for Mr. B. S. Patwalia, Advocate for respondents No.13, 14 and 23 in CWP-8475-2000. Mr. Tushar Sharma, Advocate for respondents No.12 and 15. *** JAGMOHAN BANSAL, J. (ORAL) 1. By this common order, CWP-10327-1999 and CWP- 8475-2000 are hereby adjudicated as common questions of law and ARCHANA ARORA 2025.01.16 18:00 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-10327 of 1999(O&M)and CWP-8475-2000(O&M) 2 facts are involved. For the sake of convenience, facts are borrowed from CWP-10327-1999. 2. The petitioners through instant petitions under Article 226 of Constitution of India are seeking setting aside of order dated 14.09.1998 whereby Punjab Public Service Commission has granted ‘G List’ to the private respondents w.e.f. 11.02.1993. 3. The petitioners are direct recruitees. They were recruited on the post of DSPs on 08.08.1994. They were confirmed in the year 1996. The private respondents are promotee DSPs. The private respondents were promoted on adhoc basis in the year 1989 and their promotion was approved by Punjab Public Service Commission in the year 1993. The respondent-Commission has granted ‘G List’ to private respondents w.e.f. 11.02.1993. The petitioners are claiming that private respondents should not be granted ‘G List’ w.e.f. 11.02.1993. 4. The issue involved in the instant petitions was decided by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court in a bunch of writ petitions including CWP-6801-2013 (Gurdial Singh and others Vs. State of Punjab and others). The Court vide judgment dated 02.11.2018 issued slew of directions which are reproduced as below:- “ ! "#$% &#'()* !" # # $ %&'(') ARCHANA ARORA 2025.01.16 18:00 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-10327 of 1999(O&M)and CWP-8475-2000(O&M) 3 %&'('%*%('' $ #+ % '('+ $, -. / ! # # " - # # #. $ $ %&'('%*%(''# ## !" ## ,-/" $ ! 0## . $ ## ,$ " ! 0## # $1 " $ #- # # $ .## $ !" $ # # -$# #.%*%('' $ $ $ $ 2 3 $ # # $ # $ # # $ -$. 4 $ ## # 1 !" ## $5 $ , # # $ 3 # -.6 $ %&'(' %*%('' ARCHANA ARORA 2025.01.16 18:00 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-10327 of 1999(O&M)and CWP-8475-2000(O&M) 4 ## !"## # %*%('' $ 7 " ! 0## $ 1 # $ $ # # ''+ &/ $ %%('' $ # ## $ $ # $ %%(''$ #$# # $1 $ # 8%9# &%9 ## $ ## $ ## ,$ " ! 0## # %%('' ## ) * # $ # # + " ## $ # #) 2 ## # 6:4; # # ( 2 3 2# 3 # 3 ARCHANA ARORA 2025.01.16 18:00 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-10327 of 1999(O&M)and CWP-8475-2000(O&M) 5 3# $ 2 3## $ 3## # 2 <# 3 $ $ $ # $ $ 2 ) = $ $ $ + # $ ## + $ $ $ 0 3 0 $ $ # # # $ # $ $ > 5. The respondents in compliance of directions of this Court has recast seniority list of DSPs. 6. Mr. Aman Dhir, DAG., Punjab and Mr. Tushar Sharma, Advocate submitted that issue involved in the present petitions is squarely covered by the aforecited judgment of this Court. The respondent by speaking order dated 03.07.2020 has recast seniority list of direct and promotee DSPs, thus the instant petitions have rendered infructuous. 7. Mr. R. K. Malik, Senior Advocate assisted by Mr. Sandeep Dhull, Advocate for the petitioners submits that aforecited judgment is under challenge before a Division Bench of this Court. LPA No.302 of 2019 filed against said judgment stands ARCHANA ARORA 2025.01.16 18:00 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-10327 of 1999(O&M)and CWP-8475-2000(O&M) 6 admitted. Thus, the present petitions may be adjourned sine die awaiting decision of LPA Bench. 8. The Division Bench has not stayed operation of judgment dated 02.11.2018 passed by this Court in Gurdial Singh’s case (supra). The respondent in compliance of the aforesaid judgment has already passed a detailed speaking order. The issue involved in the present petitions is squarely covered by said judgment. In the absence of stay by Division Bench, I do not find it appropriate to keep the matter pending especially when the instant petitions are pending before this Court since 1999 and 2000 respectively. As confirmed by Mr. Aman Dhir, DAG., Punjab, most of the petitioners either have retired or got further promotion. 9. The instant petitions are disposed of in terms of judgment passed by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Gurdial Singh’s case (supra). 10. Pending CM, if any, shall also stand disposed of. ( JAGMOHAN BANSAL ) JUDGE January 16, 2025 archana Whether speaking/reasoned Yes Whether Reportable : No ARCHANA ARORA 2025.01.16 18:00 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document