COCP-1729 IN THE HI 212 Gurcharan S Sh. Ramvir a CORAM: H Present: - NIDHI GUP 1. violation of Court in CW and others’ 1729-2025 (O&M) -1- E HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND H COCP Date o aran Singh Versus mvir and others M: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDH Mr. KS Sidhu, Advocate for the Mr. Manmeet Singh Teji, AAG, I GUPTA, J. (ORAL) The present contempt petitio on of order dated 08.08.2024 (Annex CWP-7096-2023, titled as ‘Gurcha ’ whereby it was directed as under “xxx xxx The argument of learned the petitioner has not been g hence he cannot get the benefi accepted, merely that the arrea mean that the petitioner is also of service despite the same b Court. Further, the action of t petitioner as a fresh appointe Labour Court is incorrect. Onc Court is to reinstate the pe petitioner is to be treated in purposes from the date of his the period he remained out of se Keeping in view the respondents in not granting service from 20.5.1994 to 20. arbitrary and illegal, and i ND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH COCP-1729-2025 (O&M) Date of Decision: 02.04.2026 .… Petitioner .... Respondents NIDHI GUPTA for the petitioner. AAG, Punjab. petition has been filed alleging (Annexure P-1) passed by the Writ urcharan Singh vs. State of Punjab under:- xxx rned counsel for respondent that en granted the arrears of salary nefit of service as well cannot be rrears are not to be paid does not also not to be granted continuity e being granted by the Labour of the respondent in treating the ointee in terms of the order of Once, the direction by the Labour petitioner with continuity, the d in service for all intents and his initial appointment, even for of service. the above, the action of the ing the petitioner the benefit of 20.2.2002 as qualify service is nd is therefore set aside. The ging Writ at ry be ot ity ur he of ur he nd or he of is he RISHU KATARIA 2026.04.06 13:48 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. COCP-1729 2. admitted by way of affi Relations, Pu Court, break benefits paya not been paid 3. submissions 23.07.2025, 1729-2025 (O&M) -2- respondents are directed to giv 20.5.1994 to 20.2.2002 as a qu recompute his pensionary ben be entitled for arrears of the computation including the arrea As the action of the res petitioner the benefit of service is bad, the arrears for which entitled for under this order, w rate of 6% per annum from the till the actual payment of the sa The writ petition is allow Learned counsel for the petitio by the respondents in their short re of affidavit of Sh. Ramvir, Secreta ons, Punjab, that in contravention of a break in service has been taken into payable to the petitioner. It is furthe en paid the salary for the period w.e.f. Learned counsel for the res ssions made in para Nos. 9 and 1 2025, which reads as follows:- “9. That in compliance with vide which benefit 20.05.1994 service was granted and as p letter dated 06.05.2025, prin pensionary benefits worth Rs.3 subsequently Rs.65,382/-(Rs. hundred eighty two only) i.e. t per annum has also been paid Treasury Vr. No. 13 (Annexure 10. That as detailed in para 5 to 22.10.1995 i.e. the period rendered service on daily wage Break has been given in t 19.02.2002 (Ttoal 2312 day appointment as cleaner, he did on any post. In this regard, in instructions No. 4/56/98-4FC o give the benefit of service from a qualifying service and thereafter benefits. The petitioner will also the pensionary benefits upon re- arrears of pension. e respondent in not granting the rvice from 20.5.1994 to 20.2.2002 hich the petitioner will become er, will also carry interest at the the date the payment became due e same. llowed in above terms…..” petitioner submits that it has been hort reply dated 23.07.2025 filed by Secretary, Information and Public n of aforesaid direction of the Writ n into account while computing the further submitted that petitioner has w.e.f. 20.05.1994 to 20.02.2002. e respondent-State refers to the and 10 of the short reply dated with Judgment dated 08.08.2024 994 to 20.02.2002 or qualifying as per concurrence of F.D vide principal amount of arrears of Rs.3,84,819/- has been paid, and, Rs. Sixty five thousand three i.e. the amount of interest @ 6% paid to him on 24.06.2025 vide xure A-3). ara 5 above that w.e.f. 20.10.1994 eriod during which the official ages/Contractual basis, total 113 in the service. Afterwards till days) i.e. before his regular e did not work in this department , in the light of below mentioned FC&GC/15404 dated 8.12.1998 m ter so he 02 me he ue een d by blic Writ has the ated 24 ng de of d, ee % de 94 ial 3 till ar nt ed 98 RISHU KATARIA 2026.04.06 13:48 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. COCP-1729 4. no break ha benefits pay order of Wr benefits wer payment sala 5. he may be p order dated 1729-2025 (O&M) -3- (Annexure A-4), he is not entit Arrear on account of Leave account of Pension and DCRG C.M. No. 13196/2025:- “The Court in Palanu Ram Krishana of India and another AIR 19 below:- “It is settled servic pay for no work i.e. pers pay and allowance durin perform the duties of a h consideration he was gradation list having de higher post w.e.f. the dat the petitioner have not e benefit retrospectively. entitled refixation of thei of the notional seniority grades so that their pre those who are immediate It is therefore, requested to the Finance Department for should first be examined in the Supreme Court. If there are sp any particular case the same s the proposal. In such cases the for completion of formalities a the matter to the Finance Depa receipt of judgment with the p can be solicited in appeal fro basis of law laid down by the stated above.” It is submitted by learned couns ak has been taken into account whi ts payable to the petitioner. It is furt of Writ Court dated 08.08.2024 (An ts were to be paid to the petitioner nt salary for the period w.e.f. 20.05.1 At this stage, learned counsel f y be permitted to withdraw the insta dated 08.08.2024 (Annexure P-1) stand entitled Arrear on account salary, ave encashment and Arrear on CRG as calculated in the present The rule laid down by Supreme hanaiah and others versus Union 1990 SC (167), is reproduced ervice rule that there should be no person will not be entitled to any uring the period which he hid not f a higher post although after due as given proper place in the g deemed to be promoted to the date his junior was promoted. So ot entitled to claim any financial ly. At the most they would be their present salary on the basis ority granted to them in different r present salary is not less than iately below them.” sted that before sending the cases t for creation of posts, each case the light of rules laid down by the re specific orders of any court in me should also be high-lighted in s the department should not wait ies at their level but should refer epartment within one week of the he proposal whether or not relief l from the Hon’ble court on the y the Hon’ble Supreme Court as counsel for the State that therefore, nt while computing the pensionary is further submitted that as per the 4 (Annexure P-1), only pensionary ioner and there is no direction for 0.05.1994 to 20.02.2002. unsel for the petitioner submits that e instant petition as, the writ Court ) stands complied with. ry, on nt me on ed no ny ot ue he he So ial be sis nt an es se he in in ait fer he ief he as nary the nary for that ourt RISHU KATARIA 2026.04.06 13:48 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. COCP-1729 6. 7. 8. 9. 02.04.2026 rishu 1729-2025 (O&M) -4- Permitted to do so. Dismissed as withdrawn. Rule stands discharged. Pending application(s), if any, s 2026 Whether speaking/reasoned Whether Reportable any, shall also stand disposed of. ( NIDHI GUPTA ) JUDGE ned Yes/No Yes/No RISHU KATARIA 2026.04.06 13:48 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment.