IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
CWP No. 10127 of 1989
DATE OF DECISION: March 31, 2009
Gian Chand Singla and others
...Petitioners
Versus
State of Punjab and others
...Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M. KUMAR
Present: Mr. Raj Paul Kansal, Advocate,
for the petitioners.
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 petitioners have claimed restoration of the benefit of one
increment of higher responsibility with effect the dates mentioned in the
writ petition. In the preliminary objection No. 1 taken in the written
statement of respondent Nos. 1 to 4 it has been pointed out that the
petitioners have already been granted one increment of higher
responsibility from the date of entry into Master Cadre. They have also
been paid arrears on account of one increment of higher responsibility
restricting the arrears to 38 months from the date of filing of C.W.P. No.
3296 of 1987. However, the claim of the petitioners that they are entitled
to arrears from the date of adjustment into Master’s cadre has been denied.
C.W.P. No. 10127 of 1989 2
The aforesaid situation has arisen because the writ petition was admitted
on 16.8.1989 whereas the written statement has been filed on 8.10.1990.
The writ petition has been rendered infrustuous and disposed
of as such.
(M.M. KUMAR)
March 31, 2009 JUDGE
Pkapoor