Disposed

Manjit Singh and Ors. v. State of Punjab and Ors.

Punjab & Haryana HC10 Jul 2013CWP/9479/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner, working as a Block Management Information System Co-ordinator, sought enhanced salary allegedly denied due to discrimination compared to other staff. The court disposed of the petition by directing the respondents to consider the claim and pass a speaking order within three months.

What did the court decide?

Direct respondents to consider the petitioners' claim and pass a speaking order within three months.

Manjit Singh and Ors. Vs State of Punjab and… — Service and Employment | Punjab & Haryana HC (2013)

¶1

-1-

¶2

CWP No. 9479 of 2013

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

CWP No. 9479 of 2013 Date of decision: 10.07.2013

¶5

Manjit Singh & others

¶6

...... Petitioners

¶7

Vs.

¶8

State of Punjab & others

¶9

..... Respondents

¶10

CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TEJINDER SINGH DHINDSA.

¶11

Present: Mr. Jaspreet Singh, Advocate for the petitioners.

¶12

Tejinder Singh Dhindsa, J. (Oral)

¶13

Counsel submits that the petitioners are presently working as Block Management Information System Co-ordinators under the Sarv Shiksha Abhiyan Scheme since January, 2011 on contractual basis. They were initially engaged on a consolidated salary of Rs. 12,000/- P.M. Such salary was thereafter increased to Rs. 16,000/- P.M. in November, 2011. The budgetary provision for the implementation of the SSA Scheme are approved and sanctioned by the Government of India. Counsel would contend that in the Project Approval Board meeting held on 19.03.2012, it was approved that for MIS Coordinators, an amount of Rs. 451.56 lacs stands sanctioned for 142 employees. In this regard, counsel would advert to the minutes of the 179^th PAB meeting held on 19.03.2012 at Annexure P-1. Based on the same, it is contended that the salary per month of each of the petitioner would come to Rs. 26,500/-. Counsel further argues that the petitioners while working as Block MIS Coordinators are being discriminated against inasmuch as, Accountants and Data Entry Operators

¶14

-2-

¶15

CWP No. 9479 of 2013

¶16

are getting salary as has been passed in the budget, whereas the petitioners are being denied the enhanced salary by adopting a different yardstick.

¶17

Without going into the merits of the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner, I deem it appropriate to dispose of the present writ petition with a direction to respondents No. 2 & 3 to consider the claim of the petitioners and to take a final decision on the legal notice dated 03.04.2013 (Annexure P-2) strictly in accordance with law and in terms of passing a speaking order within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order.

¶18

Petition disposed of.

¶19

(TEJINDER SINGH DHINDSA) JUDGE

¶20

July 10, 2013 harjeet

Manjit Singh and Ors. v. State of Punjab and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Manjit Singh and Ors. v. State of Punjab 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

Dr.Balwant Singh Sidhu Vs the State of Punjab & Others

Davinder Kaur Vs State of Punjab & Ors.

Kuldeep Singh Vs State of Punjab and Others

Banwari Lal Sharma Vs Housing Board Hry

Ram Piari Vs State of Punjab & Ors.

The Sas Nagar Housing Complex Coop House Building Society Ltd. Vs Registrar Coop Societies Pb & Ors.