CWP-6074-2023 IN T 276 Mukhtiar Singh an State of Punjab an CORAM: HON ***** Present : Mr. Mr. C ***** AMAN CHAUDH 1. Praye to grant the petitio 2. Learn 6385-2000 titled a decided on 01.12. of Punjab and a case of the petitio efforts has been u any distinctive asp relevant paras whe 3 (O&M) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJA AT CHANDIGARH CWP Date ngh and others Versus jab and another HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMAN C ***** Mr. Surinder Sharma, Advocate for th Mr. Charanpreet Singh, AAG, Punjab ***** AUDHARY, J. (ORAL) yer made in the present petition petitioners pay scale of Rs.570-1080 w Learned counsel prays for disposing titled as Amrit Lal and others vs. St 01.12.2018 decided on basis of Nirma and another, CWP-22834-2013, on petitioners on all fours, which learn been unable to controvert regards the ive aspects in the aforementioned judg as whereof read thus:- “By way of the present directions to the respondents t 1080 w.e.f. 01.04.1984 which Rs.1500-2640 w.e.f. 01.1.198 dated 20.1.1999 (Annexure P petitioner states that the case covered by the ratio of law laid 22834-2013 titled as Nirmal S Punjab and another, decided on 1 UNJAB & HARYANA ARH CWP-6074-2023 (O&M) Date of decision: 22.01.2025 ...Petitioners ...Respondents AN CHAUDHARY e for the petitioners. Punjab. ition is for directing the respondents 1080 w.e.f 01.04.1984. osing of the case in terms of CWP- vs. State of Punjab and another, Nirmal Singh and others vs. State , on 22.03.2018, as it covers the learned State counsel despite best ds the factual position and draw out d judgment or cite any contrary law, sent petition, the petitioners seek dents to grant pay scale of Rs.570- which was subsequently revised to .1.1986 in view of the judgment ure P-1). Learned counsel for the case of the petitioners is squarely aw laid down by this Court in CWP rmal Singh and others Vs. State of ded on 22.03.2018 (Annexure A-5). ents her, tate the best out law, seek d to ent rely WP e of ASHOK KUMAR 2025.01.23 14:03 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-6074-2023 3. The p 22.01.2025 ashok Whet Whet 3 (O&M) Learned State counsel fairl raised on behalf of the petitione Heard. In Nirmal Singh's case (supr "Vide order dated 05.08.20 directed to file an additiona of trifurcation of departmen the candidates who were Agricultural Sub Inspector order dated 05.08.2016, an Agriculture (HQ), Punjab been stated that due to elap pertaining to the option ta traceable. Thereafter, the opportunity to file a com dated 09.03.2018 and in re of affidavit dated 15.03 Agriculture (HQ). Punjab o and 2 has been filed. How regard to the option, if any the relevant time. Therefor 22.03.2013 (Annexure P Consequently, the order da 7) is hereby set aside an allowed in terms of judgm (Annexure P-5). The respon the case of the petitioners and release the admissible three months from the date of this order.” Keeping in view the pray position, 2 of 3 the present pe Nirmal Singh's case (supra). T release the admissible benefits within a period of three month certified copy of this order. T period of 38 months in view o Kumari Vs. State of Punjab, 19 The petition is disposed of in terms of Whether speaking : Whether reportable : 2 el fairly concedes to the assertion etitioners. (supra) it has been held as under:- .08.2016, learned State counsel was ditional affidavit whether at the time artment any option was taken from were working on the post of spector or not. In response to the 16, an affidavit of Deputy Director unjab has been filed wherein it has to elapse of long period, the record tion taken by the candidates is not , the State was again afforded an a comprehensive reply, vide order d in response thereto, reply by way 15.03.2018 of Deputy Director, njab on behalf of respondent Nos. 1 . However, the reply is silent with if any, taken from the candidates at herefore, the impugned order dated re P-7) deserves to be set aside. der dated 22.03.2013 (Annexure P- ide and the present petitions are judgment passed in LPA- 862-2000 respondents are directed to consider ioners in the light of Annexure P-5 issible benefits, within a period of e date of receipt of a certified copy e prayer made and the admitted sent petition is allowed in terms of ra). The respondents are directed to enefits in favour of the petitioners months from the date of receipt of a rder. The arrears are restricted to a view of the law laid down in Saroj jab, 1998(3) SCT 664 (FB) (P&H).” rms of Amrit Lal (supra). (AMAN CHAUDHARY) JUDGE Yes/No Yes/No tion was time rom t of the ctor has cord not an rder way ctor, s. 1 with es at ated side. are 000 ider 5 d of opy itted s of d to ners of a to a aroj ” ASHOK KUMAR 2025.01.23 14:03 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document