Disposed

Sukhbir Singh v. State of Haryana and Another

Punjab & Haryana HC19 Jan 2024CWP/1182/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a notice of motion, the petitioner sought pay-scale benefits based on a deemed date of appointment. The State agreed to consider the grievance through representation and trial within eight weeks, leading to the withdrawal of the petition without a substantive judicial order on the merits.

What did the court decide?

Petition disposed with liberty to file a representation; no substantive relief granted in the written order.

Sukhbir Singh Vs State of Haryana and Another — Service and Employment | Punjab & Haryana HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No.2023:PHHC:007136

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶3

114

¶4

CWP No. 1182-2024 (O&M) Decided on : 19.01.2024

¶5

SUKHBIR SINGH . . .PETITIONER

¶6

Versus

¶7

STATE OF HARYANA AND ANOTHER

¶8

. . . RESPONDENTS

¶9

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI

¶10

PRESENT: Mr. Vikas Kuthiala, Advocate for the petitioner.

¶11

Mr. Harish Nain, AAG, Haryana.

¶12

¶13

HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI , J. (Oral)

¶14

Learned counsel for the petitioner argues that once the petitioner has been given a deemed date of appointment on the basis of retrospective effect, he is entitled for the grant of pay-scale from the date of appointment/seniority and not from the date when he was actually appointed as the same creates the anomaly.

¶15

Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the respondents are under obligation to treat the petitioner in service from the date seniority is given to him for all the intends and purposes including the grant of pay-scale as well as pay from the relevant date.

¶16

Notice of motion.

¶17

Mr. Harish Nain, AAG, Haryana, who is present in Court, accepts notice on behalf of State of Haryana-respondents

¶18

Learned State counsel submits that the petitioner has filed the present petition without approaching the department concerned by raising the grievance as raised in the present petition, hence, in case, the petitioner has any grievance with regard to the pay-scale, he is free to file an

¶19

CWP No. 1182-2024 (O&M) -2-

¶20

2023:PHHC:007136

¶21

appropriate representation with the respondents and in case any such representation is filed by the petitioner, the same will be considered and decided in accordance with law within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of any such representation from the petitioner by passing appropriate speaking order and in case, after the decision, the petitioner is found entitled for any benefit, the same will be extended to him within a further period of four weeks .

¶22

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that keeping in view the statement of learned State counsel, the present petition may kindly be disposed of having been not pressed, at this stage, with liberty to file a representation with respondents so as to raise all the claims as raised in the present petition.

¶23

7. Ordered accordingly.

¶24

(HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI) JUDGE 19.01.2024 Riya Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether Reportable: Yes/No

Sukhbir Singh v. State of Haryana and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sukhbir Singh v. State of Haryana and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Neelam Devi Vs State of Haryana and Others

Jai Parkash and Another Vs State of Haryana and Others

Kamla and Another Vs State of Haryana and Others

Bijender Singh Vs State of Haryana and Ors.

Ajay Khurana Vs State of Haryana and Ors.

Aniket Diwedi Vs State of Haryana and Others