Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Punjab and Haryana · body

2025 DAILYLAW 93854 (PNJ)

NACHHATAR SINGH AND OTHERS v. STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS

CWP/27510/2022 · 2025-08-05

Rohit Kapoor

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP-27510-2022 (O&M) Date of decision : 05.08.2025 Nachhatar Singh and others ...Petitioners Vs. State of Punjab and others ...Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ROHIT KAPOOR Present: Mr. Sunny Singla, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. Puru Jarewal, DAG, Punjab Mr. Anupam Singla, Advocate for respondent No.3. *** ROHIT KAPOOR , J. (Oral) 1. The present petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to grant the petitioners, who retired as Chief Inspector, the revised pay scales in terms of the notification dated 21.12.2011 (Annexure P-7), vide which the Station Supervisor were granted the grade pay of Rs.3800/- w.e.f. 01.01.2006 and Rs.4200/- w.e.f. 01.12.2011, as the posts of Station Supervisor and Chief Inspectors were plaed in same pay scale as per recommendation of 5th pay commission, which has been approved by the Corporation. Further prayer is made for quashing the order dated 28.01.2022 (Annexure P-10) whereby the claim of the petitioners was rejected by respondent No.2. DINESH KUMAR 2025.08.12 09:20 I am the author of this document at the bottom of left side CWP-27510-2022 (O&M) -2- 2. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent No.3 at the very out set has pointed out that the issue involved in the present petition already stands adjudicated by a Division Bench of this Court in LPA-1026- 2023 (O&M) dated 17.02.2025 (Malkit Singh and Ors. vs. State of Punjab and Another), whereby the claim of the similarly situated employees has been rejected. 3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners does not controvert the said position. 4. In view thereof, the present petition is dismissed in terms of the decision of the Division Bench of this Court in LPA-1026-2023 dated 17.02.2025 (supra). 5. Pending applications, if any, stand disposed of accordingly. (ROHIT KAPOOR) 05.08.2025 JUDGE dinesh Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes No Whether Reportable : Yes No DINESH KUMAR 2025.08.12 09:20 I am the author of this document at the bottom of left side