Petitioner sought directions for six years of past service benefit rendered in another college. Relying on a prior judgment by this court, the petition was filed. Learning that the Supreme Court had set aside the earlier judgment due to lack of State concurrence, the present petition was dismissed.
None; the writ petition is dismissed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Civil Writ Petition No. 7731 of 1997 -1-
IN THE PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARH
Civil Writ Petition No. 7731 of 1997 (O&M)
Date of decision : 3.8.2012
Mrs. Ritu Kapur
..... Petitioner
vs
State of Punjab and others
..... Respondents
Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Bindal
Present: Mr. Sunil Chadha, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Satish Bhanot, Additional Advocate General, Punjab. Mr. Sharad Choudhary, Advocate, for respondent no. 4.
Rajesh Bindal J.
The present petition has been filed by the petitioner, who is working in D. D. Jain Memorial College for Women, Ludhiana seeking a direction to the respondents to grant her benefit of six years of past service rendered by her in S. D. College, Panipat. The reliance was placed upon a judgment of this court in Civil Writ Petition No. 17354 of 1994 – Dr. Mahesh Chander and others vs State of Punjab and others decided on 20.11.1995.
As is evident from order dated 28.11.1997, the stand taken by the State was that SLP had been filed against the aforesaid judgment before Hon'ble the Supreme Court. The case was adjourned to be listed after the judgment of Hon'ble the Supreme Court.
After the judgment of Hon'ble the Supreme Court was received in the aforesaid case, the petition was listed.
Civil Writ Petition No. 7731 of 1997 -2-
A perusal of the judgment of Hon'ble the Supreme Court in Civil Appeal Nos. 4053-4054 of 1998 Director of Public Instructions, Punjab vs Mahesh Chander and others, shows that the judgment of this court in Dr. Mahesh Chander' s case (supra), was set aside noticing that since State had not given concurrence, this court was not right in granting benefits to the respondents therein of the letter dated 27.11.1990 issued by the University Grants Commission.
In view of the aforesaid fact, in my opinion, the petitioner is not entitled to the relief prayed for. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed.
3.8.2012 vs.
(Rajesh Bindal) Judge
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner is entitled to benefit of past service rendered previously.
Whether the direction granted by this court in a prior judgment remains valid after it was set aside by the Supreme Court.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Dr. Mahesh Chander and others vs State of Punjab and othersReferred¶13
Civil Writ Petition No. 17354 of 1994
Director of Public Instructions, Punjab vs Mahesh Chander and othersDistinguished¶17
Civil Appeal Nos. 4053-4054 of 1998
Mrs. Ritu Kapur
State of Punjab
Rajesh Bindal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
