Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Punjab and Haryana · body

2025 DAILYLAW 55335 (PNJ)

RAJINDER KUMAR v. STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS

CWP/13178/2025 · 2025-07-10

Tribhuvan Dahiya

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

CWP- 13178-2025 -1- 127 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP- 13178-2025 Date of Decision: 10.07.2025 RAJINDER KUMAR ..... PETITIONER VERSUS STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS ....RESPONDENTS CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TRIBHUVAN DAHIYA Present: Mr. Jaspal Singh Maanipur, Advocate for the petitioner. TRIBHUVAN DAHIYA , J. (ORAL) The petition has been filed inter alia seeking a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to grant the pay scale attached to the post of Drawing Master, i.e., ₹5500-9000 instead of ₹5000-7850 to the petitioner in terms of the Haryana Civil Services (Revised Pay) Rules, 1998, with effect from 01.01.1996 revised from 01.01.2006, and further revision of pay scale with effect from 01.01.2016, with all consequential benefits, in view of law laid down by this Court in Amrik Singh v. Punjab State Electricity Board, 1992 (2) SCT 302. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that grievance raised SEEMA 2025.07.14 10:30 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP- 13178-2025 -2- herein is pending for appropriate decision before respondents. At this stage, petitioner will be satisfied in case respondent no.2 is directed to decide his pending legal notice, dated 16.01.2025, Annexure P-8, in a specified period. 3. Notice of motion. 4. Ms. Tanushree Gupta, Deputy Advocate General, Haryana, accepts notice on behalf of the respondents/State, and submits that the pending legal notice, dated 16.01.2025, will be decided by respondent no.2/ Additional Chief Secretary to Government of Haryana, Finance Department, by passing a speaking order in accordance with law, and in view of law laid down in Amrik Singh case (supra), within three months. 5. In view of the statement made, learned counsel for the petitioner has no objection to the petition being disposed of in terms thereof. 6. Ordered accordingly. 7. In case the order is not passed within the stipulated period, the ₹ officer concerned shall pay costs of 50,000 to the petitioner. (TRIBHUVAN DAHIYA) 10.07.2025 JUDGE Sima Sima Sima Sima Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No SEEMA 2025.07.14 10:30 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document