Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Punjab and Haryana · body

2025 DAILYLAW 80277 (PNJ)

DAVINDER KAUR AND ORS v. STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS

CWP/20641/2025 · 2025-07-23

Aman Chaudhary

Transfer Petitionbody2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 115+122 CWP-20641-2025 (O&M) Date of decision: 23.07.2025 Davinder Kaur and Others ....Petitioners Versus State of Punjab and Others ...Respondents CWP-20672-2025 (O&M) Inderjit and Others ....Petitioners Versus State of Punjab and Others ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMAN CHAUDHARY ***** Present : Mr. Risham Raag Singh, Advocate for Mr. Ranjivan Singh, Advocate for the petitioners Mr. Satnam Preet Singh Chauhan, DAG Punjab ***** AMAN CHAUDHARY, J. (ORAL) 1. These cases involve similar issues and therefore, are being disposed of together by this common judgment. 2. The prayer made in the present petitions for directing the respondents to grant minimum pay scale i.e. Basic Pay + Dearness Allowance (DA) as revised from time to time at par with regular counterparts, instead of Fixed Consolidated Salary. 3. Learned counsel submits that the claim in the present petitions is squarely covered by the judgment passed by this Court in CWP-26367-2018 titled as Pritpal Kaur and Others vs. State of Punjab and Another, decided on 25.11.2024 along with another connected case, Annexure P-7, with regard to which, legal notices dated 13.01.2025 and 25.01.2025, Annexure P-8 have been served upon respondents as also to the postal receipts thereof are Annexure P-9. MOHIT 2025.07.23 16:53 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-20641-2025 (O&M) CWP-20672-2025 (O&M) -2- Thereafter, vide orders dated 08.05.2025 and 26.05.2025, Annexures P-10 and P- 11, similarly situated employees have been granted the benefit as claimed for by the petitioners, leading to serving of supplementary notices dated 11.06.2025, Annexure P-12 in both cases, however, the same have yet not evoked any response. He thus, on instructions prays that a direction may be given to the respondents to decide the aforesaid notices, keeping in view the aforesaid judgment in a time bound manner. 4. Learned State counsel has no objection to the limited prayer made. 5. In view of the above and without commenting on the merits of the case, these petitions are hereby disposed of with a direction to the respondents to decide the legal notices and supplementary notices dated 13.01.2025 and 25.01.2025, Annexure P-8 and 11.06.2025, Annexure P-12 in both cases, taking note of the afore-referred judgment within a period of 4 months, which this Court has no reason to believe the authorities would not address in a just, fair and reasonable manner. Upon doing so, after notice and hearing offered to them and if found entitled, grant the benefit forthwith. Needless to say, if the orders are adverse to their interest, the same shall contain reasons and the petitioners shall be free to seek legal redress thereupon. 6. A photocopy of this order be placed on the file of connected case. (AMAN CHAUDHARY) JUDGE 23.07.2025 M.Kamra Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes / No Whether reportable : Yes / No MOHIT 2025.07.23 16:53 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document