IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT 400 Surinder Kumar State of Punjab and others CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMAN CHAUDHARY Present: None Mr. Manipal Singh Atwal, DAG, Punjab. *** AMAN CHAUDHARY, J. (Oral) 1. Prayer made in the present petition for directing the respondents to release arrears of pay impugned orders dated respectively). 2. A perusal of the averments made in the petition reveals that as per the order dated 03.04.2003 filed by the petitioner passed in CWP however, in the impugned order consideration. 3. In view of the above, Dr. Raj Kumar, Assistant states that the respondents would not be averse to having a relook at the matter and decide afresh, taking note of the aforesaid months, uninfluenced by the order IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP-3552 Date of decision: 19.08.2025 Surinder Kumar Bhatia Versus State of Punjab and others HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMAN CHAUDHARY None for the petitioner. Mr. Manipal Singh Atwal, DAG, Punjab. *** AMAN CHAUDHARY, J. (Oral) Prayer made in the present petition for directing the respondents to release arrears of pay-scale as applicable w.e.f. 01.01.1991 as also quash the impugned orders dated 23.02.2000 and 24.06.2003 A perusal of the averments made in the petition reveals that as per the order dated 03.04.2003, passed by the Division Bench in CWP filed by the petitioner, decision had to be taken passed in CWP-13115-1994 titled as Dr. Dharam Paul vs. however, in the impugned order, there is no consideration. In view of the above, learned State counsel, on instructions Dr. Raj Kumar, Assistant Director, Department of Animal Husbandry, Punjab states that the respondents would not be averse to having a relook at the matter and decide afresh, taking note of the aforesaid uninfluenced by the orders impugned in IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 3552-2004 (O&M) Date of decision: 19.08.2025 ..Petitioner ..Respondents HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMAN CHAUDHARY Mr. Manipal Singh Atwal, DAG, Punjab. Prayer made in the present petition for directing the respondents to scale as applicable w.e.f. 01.01.1991 as also quash the 24.06.2003 (Annexures P2 and P6 A perusal of the averments made in the petition reveals that as per passed by the Division Bench in CWP-19611-2001 decision had to be taken, keeping in view the judgment Dharam Paul vs. State of Punjab no reference to the same, much less learned State counsel, on instructions from Director, Department of Animal Husbandry, Punjab states that the respondents would not be averse to having a relook at the matter and decide afresh, taking note of the aforesaid judgment, within a period of impugned in the present case, which this Prayer made in the present petition for directing the respondents to scale as applicable w.e.f. 01.01.1991 as also quash the (Annexures P2 and P6, A perusal of the averments made in the petition reveals that as per 2001, keeping in view the judgment State of Punjab, much less from Director, Department of Animal Husbandry, Punjab, states that the respondents would not be averse to having a relook at the matter within a period of 6 ASHOK KUMAR 2025.08.20 12:32 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-3552-2004 (O&M) -2- Court has no reason to believe the authorities would not address in a just, fair and reasonable manner. 4. The matter stands disposed of accordingly and if the petitioner is found entitled, grant the benefit forthwith. Needless to say, if the orders are adverse to his interest, the same may be passed after granting opportunity of hearing to him and shall contain reasons, whereupon he shall be free to seek legal redress thereupon. ( AMAN CHAUDHARY ) 19.08.2025 JUDGE ashok Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No ASHOK KUMAR 2025.08.20 12:32 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document