The High Court directed the State of Punjab to examine the petitioners' grievances concerning Assured Career Progression Scheme benefits within three months and limited potential re-fixation of pay/pension to 38 months at law.
Directions to decide grievances within 3 months and limit pay fixation to 38 months if applicable.
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.
CWP No. 17962 OF 2017
--1--
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
CWP No. 17962 OF 2017 DECIDED ON: JANUARY 29, 2018
TIRATH RAM AND OTHERS
.....PETITIONERS
VERSUS
STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS
.....RESPONDENTS
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASPAL SINGH
Present: Mr. Ashutosh Kaushik, Advocate for the petitioners.
JASPAL SINGH, J.
By virtue of instant petition preferred under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India, petitioners have sought issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus, directing the respondents to grant ACPs due after completion of 8/16/24/32 years of service as prescribed under the Assured Career Progression Scheme (ACP Scheme) formulated vide policy/circular dated 25.09.1998 (Annexure P-1) along with consequential benefits like re-fixation of pay and pension, its arrear etc. along with interest @ 18% per annum.
Sonika 2018.02.01 15:18 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh
CWP No. 17962 OF 2017
--2--
look into the grievances unfolded by the petitioners in their legal notice dated 11.06.2017 (Annexure P-5) and to decide the same in accordance with Rules, Regulations and Instructions issued by Govt. from time to time, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. In case, the concerned authorities come to the conclusion that petitioners are entitled to the relief claimed, that would stand restricted to 38 months in view of Full Bench judgment of this Court in “Saroj Kumari v. State of Punjab and others”, 1998(3) SCT 664.
JANUARY 29, 2018 (JASPAL SINGH) sonika JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Yes Whether reportable Yes/No
Sonika 2018.02.01 15:18 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh
2 issues framed by the court
Whether to direct the respondent authorities to decide the petitioners' grievances regarding Assured Career Progression Scheme benefits within three months.
Whether the relief of re-fixation of pay or pension, if granted, should be restricted to 38 months based on the Full Bench judgment.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Saroj Kumari v. State of Punjab and othersReferred¶20
Saroj Kumari v. State of Punjab and others, 1998(3) SCT 664
TIRATH RAM AND OTHERS
STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS
JASPAL SINGH
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
