The petitioner, a police officer, filed a writ petition for unpaid salary and arrears. The court noted a prior order was satisfied on an understanding and that a subsequent government order resolved the arrears dispute, disposing of the petition as satisfied.
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.
Rajan Kumar 2014.01.17 12:58 I attest to the accuracy and[1] integrity of this document Chandigarh
CWP No.17393-CAT of 2001
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
CWP No.17393-CAT of 2001 Date of Decision: 15.01.2014
Lalit Bhatia IPS
... Petitioner
Versus
State of Punjab and others
... Respondents
CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KISHAN KAUL, CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN PALLI
Present:None for the petitioner.
Mr. Alok Jain, Additional Advocate General, Punjab, for respondents No.1 to 3.
None for respondents No.4 and 5.
SANJAY KISHAN KAUL, CHIEF JUSTICE (Oral)
The grievance of the petitioner before CAT was that on his promotion as DIG w.e.f. 01.07.1992 and as IGP w.e.f. 02.09.1992 and thereafter as Additional Director General of Police on 11.09.2000, he has not been paid the salary nor arrears of pay for the period of 01.07.1992 to 01.09.1992 and 02.09.1992 to 22.05.1996 as DIG and IGP, respectively.
It appears that no written statement was filed before the CAT by the respondents but the salary of the petitioner in the rank of Addl. DGP was released but there remains a dispute about a sum of `1,17,173/- as arrears of pay as DIG and IGP. The petition was, however, disposed of on 23.04.2001 apparently on an understanding that the grievance stood satisfied. The
[2]
CWP No.17393-CAT of 2001
petitioner sought recall of that order but that application was dismissed on 24.07.2001 stating that the review application may be filed. But on the review application being filed, the same was also dismissed on 19.09.2001 on the basis that the order was dictated in open Court and the prayer was general in character and not specific qua the arrears' period.
Learned counsel for respondents No.1 to 3 points out that the subsequent development has been the order passed on 06.10.2005 by the office of Director General of Police, Punjab. A perusal of that order shows that the controversy over release of pay arose as there was no post in the rank available when the promotion was granted. In terms of the order dated 06.10.2005, sanction for creation of supernumerary post has been granted subject to the condition that the officer would not be entitled to any arrear but his pay will be refixed on the basis of national seniority.
It is thus submitted that that may be the reason that the petitioner is no more interested in prosecuting the petition.
We, thus, disposed of the petition as satisfied.
( SANJAY KISHAN KAUL ) CHIEF JUSTICE
( ARUN PALLI ) JUDGE
January 15, 2014 Rajan
Lalit Bhatia IPS
State of Punjab
Sanjay Kishan Kaul
Arun Palli
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
