Rinku Kumar and Ors. Vs Kamal Kishore Yadav and Anr. — Punjab & Haryana HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Rinku Kumar and Ors. Vs Kamal Kishore Yadav and Anr. — Punjab & Haryana HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Petition treated as not pressed and rule discharged on the respondents' undertaking (recorded through State counsel on instructions from the Head of the Department) 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 that period; failing compliance, the salary of both respondents to remain attached till compliance; payment of cost deferred, with automatic revival of the order dated 06.03.2025 imposing cost of Rs.5,000/- per petitioner on default.

Issue for consideration

Compliance with and enforcement of the Writ Court orders (upheld in intra-Court appeal) requiring release of the petitioners' benefits, including benefits in terms of notification dated 05.07.2021 for employees recruited prior to 17.07.2020. +1 more

Court's answer

In view of the respondents' undertaking to release the petitioners' benefits, learned counsel for the petitioners did not press the present petition.

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

Rule discharged and, keeping in view the undertaking extended by the respondents, the payment of cost is deferred.ratio¶14
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¶14

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

COCP-61-2025 (High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh, Harkesh Manuja J., oral, decided 02.04.2025): Rinku Kumar and Ors v. Kamal Kishore Yadav and Anr. Learned State counsel, on instructions from the Head of the Department, submitted that the petitioners shall be released their benefits under the orders passed by the Writ Court, which were upheld in an intra-Court appeal, within two months, and that wherever an employee was recruited prior to 17.07.2020, benefits in terms of notification dated 05.07.2021 shall be accorded within that period. In view thereof, learned counsel for the petitioners did not press the present petition. It was made clear that in case the respondents fail to comply with the undertaking, the salary of both the respondents shall remain attached till compliance is made. Rule was discharged; 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 of the petitioners shall automatically stand revived.

170/5

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

COCP- 61-2025 Date of Decision: April 02, 2025

RINKU KUMAR AND ORS

........Petitioners

Versus

KAMAL KISHORE YADAV AND ANR ........Respondents

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARKESH MANUJA

Present: M r . V.K. Sandhir, Advocate for t h e petitioners.

Mr. Gunjan Mehta, Addl. A.G. Punjab. ****

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

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