Allowed

Karam Pal and Others v. State of Haryana and Others

Punjab & Haryana HC21 Dec 2022CWP/1654/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This common order disposed of two writ petitions seeking a mandamus directing the State of Haryana to grant Dearness Allowance to contractual employees of the Permanent Lok Adalat. The court held that the matter was not res integra by relying on prior judgments and ordered compliance within three months.

What did the court decide?

Direct the respondents to grant Dearness Allowance to the petitioners and not replace them, within three months, failing which contempt proceedings will be initiated.

Karam Pal and Others Vs State of… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Punjab & Haryana HC (2022)

¶1

CWP-1654-2020 (O&M)

¶2

207 (2 cases)

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

Date of Decision:21.12.2022

¶5

1) CWP-1654-2020 (O&M)

¶6

Karam Pal and others …..Petitioners Versus State of Haryana and others ..…Respondents

¶7

2) CWP-194-2021 (O&M)

¶8

Jyoti and others …..Petitioners Versus

¶9

State of Haryana and others ..…Respondents

¶10

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN MONGA

¶11

Present: Mr. Sunil K. Nehra, Advocate for the petitioners in CWP No.1654 of 2020.

¶12

Mr. Parminder Bhukal, Advocate for the petitioner in CWP No.194 of 2021.

¶13

Mr. Saurabh Mohunta, D.A.G., Haryana.

¶14

Mr. Devansh Khanna, Advocate for

¶15

Mr. Vaibhav Narang, Advocate for respondents No.2 to 10 in CWP No.1654 of 2020.

¶16

¶17

ARUN MONGA, J. (ORAL)

¶18

Vide this common order, above mentioned two petitions are being disposed of, since not only the facts but the issues raised therein are also similar. For brevity, facts which are in dispute are being taken from CWP No.1654 of 2020.

¶19

Petition, inter alia , is for issuance of a writ in the nature of Mandamus directing the respondents to grant Dearness Allowance (DA) to the petitioners of the post of Reader in Permanent Lok Adalat for Public Utility Services in view of the judgment passed by this Court in CWP No.18057 of 2018 (Annexure P-11) and in CWP No.22747 of 2018 (Annexure P-13), which was stopped from November, 2019 onwards.

¶20

ASHISH 2022.12.22 13:19 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶21

Page 1 of 2

¶22

CWP-1654-2020 (O&M)

¶23

While issuing notice of motion on 22.01.2020, my Learned Sister Ritu Bahri, J., (as she then was seized of the matter), passed following order:-

¶24

“Learned counsel for the petitioner refers to the judgment passed by the Division Bench of this Court in Chhote Lal vs. State of Haryana and others, 2002 (4) SCT 914 to contend that the benefit of dearness allowance (DA) along with minimum of the pay scale, has to be given to the contractual employees.

¶25

Grievance of the petitioners is that vide order dated 08.03.2019, the petitioners were granted the benefit of minimum wages along with DA. However, after a gap of three months, DA is not being paid to them.

¶26

Notice of motion for 06.07.2020.

¶27

In the meantime, Dearness allowance be paid to the petitioners pursuant to the judgments passed in J.S. Yadav vs. State of Haryana and others, 2002 (1) SLR 244, Uma Rani vs. State of Haryana and others, 2017 (1) SCT 425 and Surinder Kumar and others vs. State of Haryana and others, 2002 (4) SCT 424 (Annexures P-19 to P-21). The petitioners will not be replaced by another set of contractual employees, except by way of regular recruitment.”

¶28

Having perused the aforesaid judgment, it appears that the petitioner is on parity with the petitioner in Chhote Lal’s case ibid. I need not labour all over again since issue involved herein has already been dealt with. Controversy is thus no more res integra .

¶29

Consequently, the writ petitions are disposed of with the expectation that the respondents shall comply with the ratio of the judgments as mentioned in the notion of motion order, as above. Needful exercise be carried out within a period of 3 months. Needless to say, non-compliance thereof will invite contempt proceedings.

¶30

Pending civil miscellaneous, if any, shall also stand disposed of.

¶31

(ARUN MONGA) JUDGE

¶32

December 21, 2022 ashish Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No

¶33

ASHISH 2022.12.22 13:19 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶34

Page 2 of 2

Karam Pal and Others v. State of Haryana and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Karam Pal and Others v. State of Haryana and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Pawan Purshotam Vs State of Haryana and Others

Jagdeep Singh and Others Vs State of Haryana and Others

Satbir Singh Vs State of Hy.Etc.

Jyoti and Ors. Vs State of Haryana and Others

Sanjeev Tanwer and Ors. Vs State of Haryana and Ors.

Kanhiya Lal Vs State of Haryana etc.