In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana, Chandigarh
C.W.P. No. 15227 of 2003
Date of Decision: April 22, 2009
ASI Gurnam Singh
...Petitioner
Versus
State of Punjab and others
...Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M. KUMAR
Present: Mr. Yogesh Putney, Advocate,
for the petitioner.
Ms. Sudeepti Sharma, DAG, Punjab,
for the respondents.
1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be
allowed to see the judgment?
2. To be referred to the Reporters or not?
3. Whether the judgment should be reported in
the Digest?
M.M. KUMAR, J.
The prayer made by the petitioner in the instant petition
is for quashing order dated 30.7.2003 (P-13), whereby the pay of the
petitioner has been reduced with retrospective effect and recovery has
been ordered to be effected from 1993.
2. Mr. Yogesh Putney, learned counsel for the petitioner
has at the outset stated that the issue raised by the petitioner in the
instant petition was also decided by a Division Bench of this Court in
C.W.P. No. 15227 of 2003 2
the case of ASI Amrik Singh v. State of Punjab and others (CWP
No. 15762 of 2003, decided on 5.12.2003, Annexure MA-1).
According to the view taken by the Division Bench, the determination
of the scale of pay was upheld, however, recovery sought to be
effected from similar petitioners was quashed. The order passed by
the Division Bench was challenged in S.L.P. Nos. 10273-10286 of
2004, which were also dismissed (Annexure MA-2). The aforesaid
factual position could not be controverted by the learned State
counsel.
3. In view of the above, the reduction of pay of the
petitioner as per the impugned order is upheld and the respondents
are restrained from effecting any recovery as was ordered in C.W.P.
No. 15762 of 2003 (supra).
4. The writ petition stands disposed of in the above terms.
(M.M. KUMAR)
April 22, 2009 JUDGE
Pkapoor