104 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA Shiv Narain Sharma State of Haryana and CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE TRIBHUVAN DAHIYA Present: None Ms. Tanushree Gupta, D TRIBHUVAN DAHIYA The petition has been filed mandamus directing the respondents to grant additional increments qualifications in and P-4 and the S 2. It is pleaded that Court in State of Haryana and others 2010(2) SCC 369, 20.12.1982, the date on which policy dated 20.06.1977, to the benefit, was withdrawn, are entitled to grant 3. Learned State counsel does not dispute submits that only those of the petitioners who acquired the requisite qualification prior to 20.12.1982, deserve to be considered by the respondents for grant of benefit in terms of case any such re IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP-12681-2001 Date of Decision :07.05.2025 Shiv Narain Sharma and Ors. Versus of Haryana and another HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE TRIBHUVAN DAHIYA None for the petitioners. Ms. Tanushree Gupta, Deputy Advocate General TRIBHUVAN DAHIYA, J. (ORAL) The petition has been filed inter directing the respondents to grant additional increments to the petitioners commensurate to their in terms of the Government instructions, Annexure 4 and the Supreme Court judgments, Annexures P It is pleaded that in view of the law laid down by the Supreme State of Haryana and others v. Hem Lata Gupta and others 2010(2) SCC 369, the petitioners, who obtained higher qualification prior to 20.12.1982, the date on which policy dated 20.06.1977, to the benefit, was withdrawn, are entitled to grant Learned State counsel does not dispute submits that only those of the petitioners who acquired the requisite qualification prior to 20.12.1982, deserve to be considered by the respondents for grant of benefit in terms of Hem Lata Gupta case any such representation is made by those petitioners along with IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA 2001 (O&M) Date of Decision :07.05.2025 …Petitioners ….Respondents HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE TRIBHUVAN DAHIYA eputy Advocate General, Haryana. inter alia seeking a writ of directing the respondents to grant the benefit of two/three to the petitioners commensurate to their higher overnment instructions, Annexures P-2, P-3 , Annexures P-6 and P-7. view of the law laid down by the Supreme Hem Lata Gupta and others, petitioners, who obtained higher qualification prior to 20.12.1982, the date on which policy dated 20.06.1977, which entitled them to the benefit, was withdrawn, are entitled to grant of additional increments. Learned State counsel does not dispute the factual position. She submits that only those of the petitioners who acquired the requisite qualification prior to 20.12.1982, deserve to be considered by the Hem Lata Gupta case (supra). In presentation is made by those petitioners along with PUSHPINDER SAINI 2025.05.09 10:22 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-12681-2001 requisite documentary proof within two months, their cases will be considered in the light of law laid released within three 4. In view of the statement made, the petition May 07, 2025 ps 2001 -2- requisite documentary proof within two months, their cases will be considered in the light of law laid down and the admissible benefits will be released within three months of receiving the representation. In view of the statement made, the petition May 07, 2025 Whether speaking/ reasoned Whether reportable requisite documentary proof within two months, their cases will be down and the admissible benefits will be months of receiving the representation. In view of the statement made, the petition stands disposed of. (TRIBHUVAN DAHIYA) JUDGE : Yes/No : Yes/No TRIBHUVAN DAHIYA) PUSHPINDER SAINI 2025.05.09 10:22 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document