Ankit Verma and Others Vs Mrs Anadita Mittra and Another — Punjab & Haryana HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Ankit Verma and Others Vs Mrs Anadita Mittra and Another — Punjab & Haryana HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Petition not pressed and Rule discharged. Respondents, through State counsel, to release the petitioners' benefits under the Writ Court orders (upheld in intra-Court appeal) within two months, and to accord benefits in terms of notification dated 05.07.2021 to employees recruited prior to 17.07.2020 within the same period; salaries of both the respondents to remain attached till compliance; payment of cost deferred, with the order dated 06.03.2025 imposing cost(s) of Rs.5,000/- to each petitioner to stand automatically revived upon non-compliance.

Issue for consideration

Whether the respondents would release to the petitioners their benefits under the orders passed by the Writ Court (upheld in an intra-Court appeal) within two months, and accord benefits in terms of notification dated 05.07.2021 to employees recruited prior to 17.07.2020. +1 more

Court's answer

In view of the undertaking extended by the respondents, the petition having been not pressed by the petitioners' counsel, the Rule stands discharged.

Ratio / Principle

It is made clear that in case the respondents fail to do the needful in terms of the aforesaid undertaking, the salary of both the respondents shall remain attached till the compliance is made.

Key takeaways

Keeping in view the undertaking extended by the respondents, the payment of cost is deferred.ratio¶13
In case the aforesaid undertaking is not complied with, the order dated 06.03.2025 passed by this Court imposing cost(s) of Rs.5,000/- to be paid to each of the petitioners shall automatically stand revived.ratio¶13

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Harkesh Manuja, J. (Oral) in COCP-1480-2025: Learned State counsel, on instructions from the Head of the Department, submitted that the petitioners shall be released their benefits under orders passed by the Writ Court, which were upheld in an intra-Court appeal, within two months from that day, and that wherever an employee was recruited prior to 17.07.2020, he shall be accorded benefits in terms of notification dated 05.07.2021 within the same period. In view thereof, the petitioners' counsel did not press the petition and the Rule was discharged. It was made clear that in case the respondents fail to do the needful in terms of the undertaking, the salary of both the respondents shall remain attached till compliance is made. Keeping in view the undertaking, payment of cost was deferred, and in case the undertaking is not complied with, the order dated 06.03.2025 imposing cost(s) of Rs.5,000/- to be paid to each petitioner shall automatically stand revived.

170/10 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

COCP-1480-2025 Date of Decision: April 02, 2025

ANKIT VERMA AND ORS .......Petitioners

Versus

MRS ANADITA MITTRA AND ANOTHER

.......Respondents

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARKESH MANUJA

Present: M r . Kapil Kakkar, Advocate and M r . Shreesh Kakkar, Advocate f o r the petitioners.

M r. Gunjan Mehta, Addl. A.G. P unjab. ****

HARKESH MANUJA, J. (ORAL)

L e arned State counsel on in s tructions from Head of th e Department s u bmits that the petitioners s h all be released their benefit s under orders p assed by the Writ Court whic h was upheld in an intra-Cour t appeal; within two months from today. He a lso submits that wherever a n employee wa s recruited prior to 17.07.2020, he shall be accorded benefit s in terms of notification dated 05.07.2021 wit h in the afore-stated period. In view thereof, learned couns e l for the petitioners does no t press the pr e sent petition, however it is made clear that in case th e respondents f a il to do the needful in terms of aforesaid undertaking, th e salary of both the respondents shall remain attached till the compliance i s made.

R u le discharged.

K e eping in view the undertaking extended by the respondents , the payment o f cost is deferred and in cas e the aforesaid undertaking i s not complied with, the order dated 06.0 3 .2025 passed by this Cour t imposing cost ( s) of Rs.5,000/- to be paid t o each of the petitioners shal l automatically s tand revived.

02.04.2025 Tejwinder	Whether speaking/reasoned	(HARKESH MANUJA) JUDGE Yes/No
	Whether Reportable	Yes/No

TEJWINDER SINGH 2025.04.04 15:08 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document