IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT 132 Jagdish Chand Gupta State of Punjab CORAM: HON Present : AMAN CHAUDHARY, J. (ORAL) 1. service record communicated to him of “sometimes come late to office even been Senior Assistant from which he was required to be granted the same on completion of 9 years, has not been granted, but from 24.12.2007. approached this Court, vide CWP 17.01.2023 to Annexure P withdrawn on IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Jagdish Chand Gupta Versus f Punjab and Others CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE AMAN CHAUDHARY Mr. Munish Mital, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Satnam Preet Singh Chauhan, DAG, Punjab AMAN CHAUDHARY, J. (ORAL) Learned counsel submits that the petitioner had very good service record since 2003-04 as no adverse remarks were ever communicated to him, however in the ACR for sometimes come late to office” had been recorded. Thereafter, he has been granted ACP scale on completion of Senior Assistant in terms of the order dated from which he was required to be granted the same on completion of 9 years, has not been granted, but from 24.12.2007. approached this Court, vide CWP-20508-2015, which was withdrawn on 17.01.2023 to challenge the correctness of the Annexure P-12, whereafter CWP-4177-2023 withdrawn on 22.03.2023 to avail an alternate remedy. IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP-22324-2025 (O & M) Date of decision: 04.08.2025 ....Petitioner ...Respondents BLE MR. JUSTICE AMAN CHAUDHARY Satnam Preet Singh Chauhan, DAG, Punjab. Learned counsel submits that the petitioner had very good 04 as no adverse remarks were ever in the ACR for the year 2004-05, remarks had been recorded. Thereafter, he has granted ACP scale on completion of service of 4 years as in terms of the order dated 04.12.2007, however, the date from which he was required to be granted the same on completion of 9 years, has not been granted, but from 24.12.2007. The petitioner had 2015, which was withdrawn on the correctness of the some other orders, 2023 had been filed which was 22.03.2023 to avail an alternate remedy. Thereafter, a PARVEEN KUMAR 2025.08.04 18:20 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CWP-22324-2025 -2- representation dated 06.03.2025, Annexure P-14, followed by the reminder dated 04.07.2025, has been submitted, which has yet not evoked any response. He, on instructions, prays that a direction may be given to the respondents to decide the same in a time bound manner. 2. Learned State counsel has no objection to the limited prayer made. 3. In view of the above and without commenting upon the merits of the case, this petition is hereby disposed of with a direction to the respondents to decide the representation dated 06.03.2025, within a period of 6 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 him and if found entitled, grant the benefit forthwith. Needless to say, if the orders are adverse to his interest, the same shall contain reasons and the petitioner shall be free to seek legal redress thereupon. 04.08.2025 (AMAN CHAUDHARY) parveen kumar JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes / No Whether reportable : Yes / No PARVEEN KUMAR 2025.08.04 18:20 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment.