Union of India and Others Vs Lal Singh Chauhan and Ors. — Punjab & Haryana HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Union of India and Others Vs Lal Singh Chauhan and Ors. — Punjab & Haryana HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

No relief adjudicated on merits. As prayed for, the writ petition is disposed of as not pressed further; the petitioners (through counsel) are to pass an appropriate order on the respondents' representation regarding MACP financial upgradation and pay/pension fixation within eight weeks of receipt of a copy of the order and convey it to the respondents.

Issue for consideration

Whether the order dated 04.07.2018 (Annexure P-4) passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench, Chandigarh, directing the petitioners to reconsider and decide the respondents' claim for grant of benefit of financial upgradation under the MACP Scheme and fix their pay/pension accordingly, is perverse.

Ratio / Principle

The writ petition is disposed of as having not been pressed any further; the challenge to the CAT order dated 04.07.2018 was therefore not adjudicated. This disposal accords with the statement of learned counsel for the petitioners that an appropriate order on the respondents' representation will be passed keeping in view the settled principle of law within eight weeks from receipt of a copy of the order and will be conveyed to the respondents.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Punjab & Haryana High Court (CWP-3420-2019, decided 26.08.2025, orally; Harsimran Singh Sethi and Vikas Suri, JJ.). The Union of India's writ petition challenging, as perverse, the order dated 04.07.2018 (Annexure P-4) of the Central Administrative Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench — whereby the Tribunal had directed the petitioners to reconsider and decide the claim of the respondents (Lal Singh Chauhan and others) for grant of benefit of financial upgradation under the MACP Scheme and fix their pay/pension accordingly — was disposed of as having not been pressed any further. Counsel for the petitioners stated that the antecedent issue whether promotion given after passing of the written test is to be treated as direct appointment had already been decided by the competent Court of law, and stated that an appropriate order on the respondents' representation would be passed keeping in view the settled principle of law within eight weeks of receipt of a copy of the order and conveyed to the respondents. Speaking/reasoned: Yes; Reportable: No. The perversity issue itself was not decided.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

208

CWP-3420-2019 Date of Decision: 26.08.2025

UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS

...Petitioners

Versus

LAL SINGH CHAUHAN AND ORS

...Respondents

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

Present:Mr. Arvind Moudgil, Senior Panel Counsel,(Through V.C.) with Ms. Isha Bhukal, Advocate, for the petitioners.

Mr. Ashutosh Kaushik, Advocate, for the respondents.

HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI, J. (ORAL)

In the present petition, the challenge is to the order dated 04.07.2018 (Annexure P-4) passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench, Chandigarh, by which, the petitioners have been directed to reconsider and decide the claim of the respondents for grant of benefit of financial upgradation under the MACP Scheme and fix their pay/pension accordingly, on the ground that the same is perverse.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that keeping in view that the issue whether the promotion, which has been given after the passing of the written test, has to be treated as direct appointment, has already been decided by the competent Court of law and even in the impugned order passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench,

HARISH KUMAR 2025.08.28 15:03 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment

CWP-3420-2019 -2-

Chandigarh, the only direction given is to decide the representation, appropriate order on the representation of the respondents will be passed keeping in view the settled principle of law, within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order and the said order will be

conveyed to the respondents.

Keeping in view the above, as prayed for, the present writ

petition is disposed of as having not been pressed any further.

( HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI ) JUDGE

August 26, 2025

( VIKAS SURI ) JUDGE

harish

Whether speaking/reasoned Yes Whether reportable No

HARISH KUMAR 2025.08.28 15:03 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment