Disposed

Surinder Singh v. Union of India and Ors.

Punjab & Haryana HC30 May 2013CWP/12232/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed a writ petition challenging an order dismissing the petitioner's application for regular pay. The Court allowed liberty to approach the Tribunal to modify or clarify the order to claim the minimum of the pay-scale based on recommendations, distinct from the claim for parity.

What did the court decide?

Granted liberty to approach the Tribunal for modification or clarification of the impugned order to claim the minimum of the pay-scale based on existing recommendations.

Surinder Singh Vs Union of India… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Punjab & Haryana HC (2013)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶2

Civil Writ Petition No.12232 of 2013 Date of Decision : May 30, 2013

Shri Surinder Singh

.....Petitioner

versus

Union of India and others

¶7

.....Respondents

¶8

CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT. HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE R.P.NAGRATH.

¶9

Present : Mr.A.S.Tewatia, Advocate, for the petitioner.

¶10

-.-

¶11

Whether Reporters of Local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?

¶12

2.To be referred to the Reporters or not?

¶13

3.Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?

¶14

¶15

Surya Kant, J. (Oral)

¶16

The petitioner challenges the order dated 7.1.2013 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench, Chandigarh, whereby his Original Application seeking regular pay-scale, has been dismissed primarily on the ground that he cannot claim parity with respondent No.4.

¶17

The case of the petitioner, on the other hand, is that instead of seeking pay parity with respondent No.4, he restricts his claim for the grant of minimum of the pay-scale for which recommendations have been made in his favour by the senior functionaries vide orders dated 6.6.2011 and 6.9.2010 (Annexures P-3 & P-4, respectively).

¶18

Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner, we find that the case pleaded on behalf of the petitioner before the Tribunal was apparently for pay parity with respondent No.4 and the Tribunal has rightly drawn distinction

¶19

CWP No.12232 of 2013 [2]

¶20

between the claim of the petitioner and respondent No.4 in para No.8 of its order dated 7.1.2013. However, if the petitioner wants to restrict his claim for the grant of minimum of the pay-scale on the basis of recommendations made in his favour by the authorities, we grant him liberty to approach the Tribunal with an appropriate application for modification/clarification of the order under challenge.

¶21

With liberty afore-mentioned, the writ petition is

¶22

disposed of.

¶23

(SURYA KANT) JUDGE $ May 30, 2013 (R.P.NAGRATH) Mohinder JUDGE

Surinder Singh v. Union of India and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Surinder Singh v. Union of India and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/S Simran Bright Bar Industries Vs Union of India and Ors.

Rajnish Kumar Vs Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd. and Ors.

Dharamjit Singh Vs State of Punjab and Ors.

Prem Lata and Anr. Vs State of Haryana and Ors.

M/S Baby Corn Speciality Cuisine Vs Ut of Chandigarh & Ors.

Narinder Pal Singh & Anr. Vs Central Administrative Tribubal & Ors.