Disposed¶14

Harbans Singh and Ors. v. Central Administrative Tribunal Chandigarh Bench and Ors.

Punjab & Haryana HC11 Sept 2025CWP/9362/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Pay anomaly claim; Central Administrative Tribunal, Chandigarh; dismissal vide order dated 10.01.2019 (Annexure P-9); liberty to file fresh Original Applications separately cadre wise giving due facts and law; disposal with consent of both sides; CWP-9361-2019; CWP-9362-2019; CWP-9683-2019; Babu Lal; Harbans Singh; Rulda Singh; Punjab and Haryana High Court at Chandigarh; decision date 11.09.2025; speaking/reasoned Yes; reportable No.

What did the court decide?

Liberty granted to the petitioners to file fresh Original Applications before the Tribunal separately, cadre wise, giving due facts and law; such applications to be looked into and decided by the Tribunal keeping in view the facts brought on record and the law on the issue concerned. ¶14

Harbans Singh and Ors. Vs Central Administrative Tribunal Chandigarh Bench and Ors. — Punjab & Haryana HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶14

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioners should be given liberty to approach the Tribunal separately, cadre wise, giving due facts and law regarding their claim for removal of pay anomaly, so that the Tribunal may consider whether they are entitled to the relief claimed.

¶13

Court's answer

The present petitions are disposed of with the observation that in case fresh Original Applications are filed by the petitioners separately giving the details cadre wise, the same will be looked into and decided by the Tribunal keeping in view the facts brought on record and the law on the issue concerned.

¶14

Ratio / Principle

All the petitions stand disposed of accordingly.

¶18

Key takeaways

Pending application(s), if any, stand disposed of.ratio¶19

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Punjab & Haryana High Court (Harsimran Singh Sethi and Vikas Suri, JJ.; oral order by Harsimran Singh Sethi, J.), decision dated 11.09.2025, CWPs Nos. 9361, 9362 and 9683 of 2019 (Babu Lal, Harbans Singh, Rulda Singh and others v. Central Administrative Tribunal, Chandigarh and others): After arguing for some time, learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the Tribunal, vide impugned order dated 10.01.2019 (Annexure P-9), had dismissed the petitioners' claim for removal of pay anomaly rather than asking them to file separate petitions qua their own grievance, and that the petitioners would be satisfied if permitted even now to file separate petitions raising the due claim based upon facts and law. Learned counsel for the respondents raised no objection to the petitioners approaching the Tribunal separately cadre wise giving due facts and law. Accordingly, the petitions were disposed of with the observation that fresh Original Applications filed separately, cadre wise, would be looked into and decided by the Tribunal keeping in view the facts brought on record and the law on the issue concerned. All petitions and pending application(s), if any, stand disposed of. Speaking/reasoned: Yes; Reportable: No.

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶2

208

¶3

(1) CWP-9361-2019
Date of Decision: 11.09.2025
Babu Lal and others
....Petitioners
Versus
Central Administrative Tribunal, Chandigarh and others
....Respondents
(2) CWP-9362-2019
Harbans Singh and others
....Petitioners
Versus
Central Administrative Tribunal, Chandigarh and others
....Respondents
(3) CWP-9683-2019
Rulda Singh and others
....Petitioners
Versus
Central Administrative Tribunal, Chandigarh and others
....Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKAS SURI
----
Present: Mr. Kshitij Sharma Advocate and
Mr. Shubhkarman Singh Gill, Advocate
for the petitioners (in CWPs No.9361 and 9362 of 2019).

¶4

VARINDER PRASHAD 2025.09.15 18:38 I attest to the accuracy of this document PHHC

¶5

CWPs Nos. 9361, 9362 and 9683 of 2019

¶6

-: 2 :-

¶7

Mr. Gaurav Sharma, Advocate for the petitioners (in CWP-9683-2019).

¶8

Ms. Madhu Dayal, Advocate and Ms. Chetna Thakur, Advocate for respondent No.2 (in CWP-9683-2019).

¶9

Mr. Lajwant Singh Virk, Advocate for respondents No.2 to 4 (in CWP-9361-2019).

¶10

¶11

Harsimran Singh Sethi, J. (Oral)

¶12

After arguing for some time, learned counsels for the petitioners submit that the claim of the petitioners for removal of the pay anomaly has been dismissed by the Tribunal vide impugned order dated 10.01.2019 (Annexure P-9) rather than asking the petitioners to file separate petitions qua their own grievance by giving due facts qua their claim. Learned counsel for the appellants further submits that if the permission is given to the petitioners even as of today to file separate petitions raising the due claim based upon the facts and the law, the petitioners will be happy/satisfied.

¶13

Learned counsels for the respondents raise no objection in case the petitioners are giving liberty to approach the Tribunal separately cadre wise giving due facts and law so that the same could be considered by the Tribunal as to whether the petitioners are entitled for the relief claimed or not.

¶14

Keeping in view of the above, the present petitions are disposed of with the observation that in case fresh Original Applications are filed by the petitioners separately giving the details cadre wise, the same will be looked into and decided by the Tribunal keeping in view the facts brought on record and the law on the issue concerned.

¶15

VARINDER PRASHAD 2025.09.15 18:38 I attest to the accuracy of this document PHHC

¶16

CWPs Nos. 9361, 9362 and 9683 of 2019

¶17

-: 3 :-

¶18