Union Territory Administration Chandigarh v. Suman Kaur and Anr.

Punjab & Haryana HC18 Aug 2025CWP/18809/2005

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Minimum pay scale arrears; limitation Section 21 of the Administrative Tribunal; delay in approaching the Court; Central Administrative Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench order dated 27.03.2003; O.A. No.547/CH of 1997 Gurinderjit Singh v. Union of India & others (decided 02.07.1998); arrears restricted to period from 01.03.2001 onwards; CWP-18809-2005; coram Harsimran Singh Sethi J. and Vikas Suri J.; decision date 18.08.2025.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed of accordingly, with the respondent-employee held entitled to arrears of minimum pay scale from 01.03.2001 onwards rather than from her date of engagement (16.09.1999). ¶¶21

Union Territory Administration Chandigarh Vs Suman Kaur and Anr. — Punjab & Haryana HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh

¶2

[201]

¶3

CWP-18809-2005

¶4

Date of Decision: 18.08.2025

¶5

UNION TERRITORY ADMINISTRATION CHANDIGARH

¶6

..... PETITIONER

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

SUMAN KAUR AND ANR. . .....RESPONDENTS

¶9

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKAS SURI

¶10

Present: Mr. Vivek Sharma, Advocate, Sr. Standing Counsel and Mr. Sachit Singla, Jr. Standing Counsel for the petitioner U.T. Chandigarh.

¶11

None for respondent No.1.

¶12

¶13

HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI, J. (ORAL)

¶14

In the present petition, the challenge is to the order dated 27.03.2003(Annexure P-3) passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench, by which the benefit of arrears with regard to the minimum pay scale has been extended to respondent No.1 herein from the date she was engaged i.e. 16.09.1999 till the date 16.03.2002, when she herself resigned from service.

¶15

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner-UOI submits that though the issue raised by respondent No.1 has already been decided in O.A. No.547/CH of 1997 titled as “ Gurinderjit Singh Vs. Union of India & others, decided on 02.07.1998, which judgment has already been upheld by this Court, but as there has been a delay at the hands of respondent(s) in approaching the Court, the benefit of full arrears could not have been granted.

¶16

We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and gone through the record with his able assistance.

¶17

It may be noticed that the original application was filed by respondent-employee on 18.09.2002 claiming the benefit for the service period ANJAL GUPTA 2025.08.22 10:43 starting from 16.09.1999. Even if Section 21 of the Administrative Tribunal, I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶18

CWP-18809-2005 -2-

¶19

which is being brought in operation by the learned counsel for the petitioner is accepted, then also a period of one year and six months has to be allowed for the purpose of grant of the benefit of arrears, which period would be starting from March 2001 onwards.

¶20

Keeping in view the totality of the circumstances, as the claim of the respondent-employee has gone unrebutted and the only issue is with regard to the grant of arrears, it is held that the respondent-employee will be entitled for grant of arrears from 01.03.2001 onwards.

¶21