IN THE HON’BLE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH

CWP No. 2024

Gurmel Singh S/o Sh. Amrik Singh, aged 84 years, retired PTI, Govt.

Middle School, Lohara, Complex: Government Senior Secondary

School, Bode, Distrcit Moga, Punjab, PPO No. 110060/PB R/o VPO

Bilaspur, Teh. Nihalsinghwala, Distrcit Moga (currently residing at

1811, 32 Avenue, NW, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada T6TOH3).

(Aadhaar No. 4410 9097 5048 Mobile. 9501903027)

…..Petitioner

Versus

1. State of Punjab through Principal Secretary, Department of Education,

Punjab, Sector 9-C, Chandigarh.

2. Director Public Instructions (Secondary Education), Punjab, Vidya

Bhawan, PSEB Complex, Block e, 4 th Floor, Phase 8, SAS Nagar

(Mohali).

3. District Education Officer (Secondary Education), Moga.

4. Principal, Government Middle School, Lohara Complex: Government

Senior Secondary School, Bode, District Moga.

……..Respondent

Through:

Place: Chandigarh (RANJIVAN SINGH)

Advocate
Dated: 15.05.2024
(RIPUDAMAN SINGH ROOP)
Advocate

(KANIKA TOOR) (RISHAM RAAG SINGH)

Advocate Advocate
Counsel for the Petitioner
A. Civil Writ Petition under Articles 226 &

227 of the Constitution of India for

issuance of a writ of Mandamus

directing the Respondents to re-fix the

Last Drawn Pay of the petitioner at the

time of his retirement, by way of

granting him the Annual Increment

notionally as he completed 12 months

of his continuous service on 31.12.1997

i.e. the date of his retirement, in

terms/ratio of the judgment dated

16.03.2022 (P-1) as passed in CWP No.

32598 of 2019, upheld in LPA No. 696

of 2022 vide Judgment dated

09.04.2024 (P-5) AND as a

consequence, his pensionary/retiral

benefit be re-calculated and the due

arrears thereof be disbursed to him

along with the interest @ 18% p.a.

AND

B. It is further respectfully prayed that

the petitioner be permitted to file the

legible photo/ typed copies of

Annexures P-1 to P-7 and he be further

exempted from filing the certified

copies of the same as the same are

not readily available with the

petitioner, in the interest of justice.

OR
 Any other appropriate writ, order or

directions be issued/passed as this

Hon’ble Court may deem fit in the facts

and circumstances of the instant case.

RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH:

1. That the petitioner is a citizen of India, a Punjab Government’s

Retiree who is aggrieved by non-grant of his Annual Increment in

terms of the Judgment dated 16.03.2022 (P-1) and Judgment

dated 09.04.2024 (P-5) in violation of Articles 14 & 16 of

Constitution of India; as such is entitled to invoke the

extraordinary writ jurisdiction of this Hon’ble Court under Articles

226/227 of the Constitution of India.

2. That the petitioner was appointed as PTI teacher on 23.11.1977

in the Department of Education, Government of Punjab and was

lastly posted at Government Middle School, Lohara, Complex:

Government Senior Secondary School, Bode, District Moga,

Punjab.

3. That while rendering his services, his date of Annual Increment

was fixed as 1st of January every year.

4. That after serving the said department for more than about 20

years, the petitioner retired as PTI teacher on 31.12.1997 from

the Government Middle School, Lohara, Complex: Government

Senior Secondary School, Bode District Moga, Punjab upon

attaining the age of superannuation.

5. That subsequently, the petitioner was duly granted the

pensionary/retiral benefits as per the provisions of the Punjab

Civil Services Rules by way of allotting PPO No. 110060/PB.

6. That however, despite completing 12 months of service, the

petitioner was not granted the benefit of Annual Increment, while

calculating/fixing his last drawn pay as envisaged under Rule 4.7

of the Punjab Civil Services Rules Volume 1 Part 1 primarily on

the ground that the said benefit is only granted on the very next

day of completion of 12 months of service to the employee who

is in service and has not retired. Since, the Petitioner retired on

31.12.1997, after completing 12 months from 01.01.1997 i.e. the

due date of his annual increment but and was not in service as

on 01.01.1998, as such the Annual Increment is not granted to

him.

Consequently, the emoluments which he was drawing on

the last date of his service i.e. 31.12.1997 were taken in

consideration for the purpose of computing his pensionary

benefits.

7. That Rule 4.7 of the Punjab Civil Services Rules is being

reproduced as under for ready reference and perusal of this

Hon’ble Court:-

“4.7: An increment shall ordinarily be drawn as a matter of

course, unless it is withheld. An increment may be withheld

from a Government employee by a competent authority if

his conduct has not been good or his work has not been

satisfactory. In ordering the withholding of an increment,

the withholding authority shall state the period for which it

is withheld, and whether the postponement shall have the

effect of postponing future increments.

Note: In the case of an officer/official who does not fulfil the

basic condition laid down in the respective Service Rules

regarding the minimum number of years of service, in the

 lower rank and who is promoted to a higher post by

invoking an alternative provision in the relevant rules

specifying the extent of relaxation of the basic condition,

referred to above, the initial pay in his case would be the

minimum of the post to which he is promoted/appointed till

he fulfils the condition of completing the basic minimum

period of service prescribed and the first annual increment

will be granted after one year of the date of completion of

the minimum length of qualifying service/experience,

necessary for appointment to the service, cadre or the

post. In other words for the purpose of 1 st increment his

appointment shall be deemed to have started on the date

on which he completes the minimum qualifying

service/experience, as is necessary for appointment to the

service, cadre or the post concerned. This restriction will

however not apply in cases where the officer/official was

drawing pay more than the minimum of the higher post. In

such cases pay shall be fixed in accordance with the

provisions of Rule 4.4 of these rules. The first annual

increment in such a case also will, however, be granted

after one year of the date of completion of the minimum

length of qualifying service/experience.”

8. That some similarly situated retirees of different Departments of

the Punjab Government challenged the abovementioned ground

of denial of grant of Annual Increment in this Hon’ble Court by

way of CWP No. 32598-2019 titled Gurdev Singh and others vs.

State of Punjab and others. The Petitioners therein prayed that

once they have completed 12 months of continuous service prior

to their retirement, an increment has to be granted to them in

terms of the Rule 4.7 of the Punjab Civil Services Rules Volume 1
 Part 1 and their salary and subsequently their retiral and

pensionary benefits are to calculated accordingly.

9. That this Hon’ble Court allowed the said CWP No. 32598-2019

titled Gurdev Singh and others vs. State of Punjab and others

along with 22 other petitions on 16.03.2022 by directing the

State of Punjab to grant the petitioners the benefit of one

Notional Increment so as to fix their last drawn pay at the time of

their retirement and further to re-calculate their pensionary

benefits on the basis of the said last drawn pay within the period

of 3 months.

Copy of the Judgment dated 16.03.2022 as passed by this

Hon’ble Court in CWP No. 32598 of 2019 titled Gurdev Singh and

others vs. State of Punjab is annexed herewith as Annexure P-

1.

10. That while passing the Judgment dated 16.03.2022 (P-1) reliance

was placed upon the Judgment dated 15.09.2017 as passed by

the Hon’ble Madras High Court in CWP No. 15732 of 2017 titled

P. Ayyamperumal vs. Central Administrative Tribunal, Madras

Bench, Chennai and others as upheld by the Hon’ble Supreme

Court of India.

11. That when the petitioner approached the departmental

authorities for the grant of similar relief as settled upto Hon’ble

Supreme Court of India by way of re-fixing his last pay drawn and

consequently his retiral/pensionary benefits, he was conveyed

that the said benefit could not be granted to him since he is not

a petitioner in any case. The said in-action on part of the

Department Authorities is unjust, illegal, arbitrary and violative of

Article 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India.

12. That in view of the above factual and legal position, the

petitioner served a Legal Notice dated 22.02.2023 upon the

respondents by way of Registered Post, claiming re-fixation of his

last pay drawn and consequential revision of pensionary/retital

benefits by way of granting Annual Increment on completion of

12 months of his service (01.01.1997 to 31.12.1997) in terms of

Judgment dated 16.03.2022 (P-1) passed in CWP No. 32598 of

2019.

Copy of the Legal Notice dated 22.02.2023 alongwith its

Postal Receipt of even date are being annexed herewith as

Annexure P-2 and Annexure P-3 respectively.

13. That in response to the said Legal Notice dated 22.02.2023 (P-2),

the Respondent No. 2 i.e. the Director General of School

Education (Secondary), Punjab issued Memo No. 482376-12/09-

2023Establisment-5(1)/2023109309 dated 18.04.2023 as

addressed to the undersigned counsel to communicate that

against the said Judgment dated 16.03.2022 (P-1) as passed in

CWP No. 32598 of 2019, the State of Punjab has filed various

LPAs. Accordingly, it was stated in the Memo dated 18.04.2023

that the claim raised by the petitioner in the said Legal Notice

dated 22.02.2023 (P-2) shall be considered after the decision in

the said LPAs.

Copy of the said Memo dated 18.04.2023 is being annexed

herewith as Annexure P-4.

14. That it is noteworthy that the bunch of said LPAs, LPA No. 696 of

2022 titled State of Punjab vs. Malagar Singh being the lead one,

has been dismissed by the Division Bench of the Hon’ble Punjab

and Haryana High Court vide its Judgment dated 09.04.2024

whereby upholding the Judgment dated 16.03.2022 (P-1) as

 passed by the Hon’ble Punjab and Haryana High Court in CWP

No. 32598 of 2019.

Copy of the said Judgment dated 09.04.2024 as passed in

LPA No. 696 and other connected matters is being annexed

herewith as Annexure P-5.

15. That thereafter, the Petitioner apprised the said factum of

dismissal of the LPA No. 696 of 2022 vide Judgment dated

09.04.2024 (P-5) to the Respondent – Department by way of a

Supplementary Legal Notice dated 30.04.2024 and reiterated his

claim for the grant of his due annual increment on competition of

his 12 months service.

Copy of the said Supplementary Legal Notice dated

30.04.2024 and its Postal Receipts are being are being annexed

herewith as Annexure P-6 and Annexure P-7.

16. That since the issuance of the said Supplementary Legal Notice

dated 30.04.2024 (P-6) along with the Judgment dated

16.03.2022 (P-1) and Judgment dated 09.04.2024 (P-5), a period

of almost 1 month has elapsed but there is no response from the

Respondent – Department on the claim of the Petitioner

regarding re-fixation of his pay/pension after granting him his

due Annual Increment upon completion of 12 months of service.

17. That the inaction on the part of the Respondents by not acceding

to the legitimate claim of the Petitioner by way of granting him

the Annual Increment on completion of 12 months of service

(01.01.1997 to 31.12.1997) and further not re-fixing his last pay

drawn and releasing the consequential revision of

pensionary/retital benefits in terms of Judgment dated

16.03.2022 (P-1) passed in CWP No. 32598 of 2019 as upheld by

 the Hon’ble Division Bench vide Judgment dated 09.04.2024 (P-

5), is not only illegal, arbitrary, unjust but also in violation of

Article 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India.

18. That it is a settled position of law that once an issue has been

settled by the Judicial Pronouncement, then the similar relief be

granted to the similarly situated person(s)/employees and they

should not be forced/compelled to knock the doors of the Courts

time and again.

19. That a writ of Mandamus directing the Respondents to re-fix the

Last Drawn Pay of the petitioner by granting one Annual

Increment and releasing its arrears is, inter alia, liable to be

issued on the following grounds:-

GROUNDS

i) That Rule 4.7 of Punjab Civil Services Vol I Part I

provides that once an employee completes 12

months of service prior to his/her retirement, he is

entitled for the grant of an annual increment and his

salary/ retiral and pensionary benefits are to be

calculated accordingly.

ii) That interpreting the said Rule 4.7, this Hon’ble court

while allowing CWP No. 32598 of 2019 vide its

Judgment dated 16.03.2022 (P-1) has held that the

employees who retired on completion of 12 months of

service are entitled for calculation of their retiral

benefits on the basis of last pay drawn after the grant

of Annual Increment.

iii) That the LPA No. 696 of 2022 and other connected

matters as filed against the Judgment dated

16.03.2022 (P-1) has been dismissed by the Hon’ble

 Division Bench of this Court vide its Judgment dated

09.04.2024 (P-5).

iv) That the Petitioner has retired on 31.12.1997 i.e. after

the completion of 12 months of service after he was

granted his Annual Increment on 01.01.1997 as such

is entitled for the grant of another Annual Increment

and consequential re-fixation of his last pay drawn in

view of the afore-stated Judgments dated 16.03.2022

(P-1) and 09.04.2024 (P-5).

v) That the non-grant of the Annual Increment to the

petitioner on the completion of 12 months of service

prior to his retirement is, thus, against the mandate of

Rule 4.7 of Punjab Civil Service Rules and Judicial

Pronouncements (P-1 and P-5) and as such is violative

of Articles 14 & 16 of the Constitution of India.

20. That the following law points emerge out of the present petition

for the kind perusal of this Hon’ble Court:-

a) Whether the Petitioner, who has completed 12

months of service prior to his retirement on

31.12.1997, is entitled for the grant of an annual

increment and his salary/ retiral and pensionary

benefits are to be calculated accordingly in terms

with Rule 4.7 of Punjab Civil Services Vol I Part I?

b) Whether the Petitioner, is entitled for the grant of

Annual Increment notionally in terms of the Judgment

dated 16.03.2022 (P-1) as passed by this Hon’ble

Court in CWP No. 32598 of 2019 as upheld vide

Judgment dated 09.04.2024 (P-5).

c) Whether the non-grant of the Annual Increment to

the petitioner on the completion of 12 months of

 service prior to his retirement is against the mandate

of the said Rule 4.7 and Judicial Pronouncements (P-1

and P-5) and as such is violative of Articles 14 & 16 of

the Constitution of India?

21. That the petitioner have not filed any other such or similar writ

petition in this Hon’ble Court or in the Hon’ble Supreme Court of

India.

22. That there is no other alternative remedy of appeal or revision

available with the petitioner except to approach this Hon’ble

High Court under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India.

It is, therefore, most respectfully prayed that:-

(i) the record of the case be sent for: -

(ii) For issuance of a writ of Mandamus directing

the Respondents to re-fix the Last Drawn Pay

of the petitioner at the time of his retirement,

by way of granting him the Annual Increment

notionally as he completed 12 months of his

continuous service on 31.12.1997 i.e. the date

of his retirement, in terms/ratio of the

judgment dated 16.03.2022 (P-1) as passed in

CWP No. 32598 of 2019, upheld in LPA No. 696

of 2022 vide Judgment dated 09.04.2024 (P-5)

AND as a consequence, his pensionary/retiral

benefit be re-calculated and the due arrears

thereof be disbursed to him along with the

interest @ 18% p.a.

(iii) It is further respectfully prayed that the

petitioner be permitted to file the legible

photo/ typed copies of Annexures P-1 to P-7

 and he be further exempted from filing the

certified copies of the same as the same are

not readily available with the petitioner, in the

interest of justice.

(iv) Any other appropriate writ, order or directions

be issued/passed as this Hon’ble Court may

deem fit in the facts and circumstances of the

instant case.

(v) Requirement of filling advance notice on the

respondents be dispensed with;

(vi) Costs of the petition are also awarded in favour

of the petitioner.

(GURMEL SINGH)

PETITIONER

Through:

Place: Chandigarh (RANJIVAN SINGH)

Advocate
Dated: 15.05.2024
(RIPUDAMAN SINGH ROOP)
Advocate

(KANIKA TOOR) (RISHAM RAAG SINGH)

Advocate Advocate

Counsel for the Petitioner

VERIFICATION:

Verified that the contents of the writ petition from para 1 to 18 and 21

& 22 are true and correct to my knowledge. Legal submission have

been made in para 19 & 20 on the advise of my counsel and believed

to be true. No part of it is false and nothing has been kept concealed

therein.
Place: Chandigarh

Dated : 15.05.2024

PETITIONER
 IN THE HON’BLE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH

CWP No. of 2024

Gurmel Singh
….. Petitioner
Versus
State of Punjab and others
….. Respondents

Affidavit of Gurmel Singh S/o Sh. Amrik Singh,

aged 84 years, R/o VPO Bilaspur, Teh.

Nihalsinghwala, Distrcit Moga (currently

residing at 1811, 32 Avenue, NW, Edmonton,

Alberta, Canada T6TOH3)

(Aadhaar No. 4410 9097 5048 Mobile. 9501903027)

I, the above named deponent, do hereby solemnly affirm and

declare as under:-

1. That the deponent has gone through the contents of paras 1 to 22

of the enclosed writ petition and has understood the same.

2. That copy of Aadhaar Card and residential address has been

annexed as proof of identity of the deponent with this petition.

3. That the deponent affirms that the contents of paras 1 to 22 of the

enclosed petition are true and correct to his knowledge and

nothing material has been concealed therein.

4. That for the relief claimed in the present petition, deponent has not

filed any such or similar petition either in this Hon’ble Court or in

the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India.

Place: Chandigarh

Dated : 18.05.2024

DEPONENT

VERIFICATION

Verified that the contents of paras 1 to 4 of my aforesaid

affidavit are true and correct to my knowledge and nothing material

has been concealed therein.

Place: Chandigarh

Dated : 18.05.2024

DEPONENT
 IN THE HON’BLE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH

CWP No. of 2024

Gurmel Singh

….. Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab and others

….. Respondents

INDEX

Sr. Particulars Date Pages Court

No. Fee
1 Synopsis 15.05.2024 1-2

2 List of Dates & Events 15.05.2024 3-5

3 Civil Writ Petition 15.05.2024 6-18 50.00

4 Affidavit 18.05.2024 19-20

5 Annexure P-1 16.03.2022 21-38 2.75

(HC Judgment)

6 Annexure P-2 22.02.2023 39-42 3.00

(Legal Notice)

7 Annexure P-3 22.02.2023 43 0.65

(Postal Receipt)

8 Annexure P-4 (Memo) 18.04.2023 44 0.65

9 Annexure P-5 29.04.2024 45-50 2.75

(HC Judgment)

10 Annexure P-6 30.04.2024 51-53 2.00

(Supplementary Legal

Notice)

11 Annexure P-7 01.05.2024 54 0.65

(Postal Receipt)

VERNACULAR
12 Annexure P-4 18.04.2023 55

(Memo)

13 Power of Attorney 19.01.2023 56 2.75

14 Aadhaar Card 57 0.65

TOTAL 70.00

Note:

1. The Main law points in this petition are canvassed in Para No. 20

at Page No.16.

2. Relevant Statute/ : (i) Articles 14, 16 and 226/227

of the Constitution of India.
Rules
(ii) Rule 4.7 of Punjab Civil
Services Vol I Part I.
3. Whether Caveat : No notice/Caveat Petition

Petition has been filed has been received/filed in

in the case the present writ petition.

4. Similar Case if any (i) Gurdev Singh and others vs.

State of Punjab and others
allowed vide Judgment
dated 16.03.2022 (P-1).

(ii) LPA No. 696 of 2022 titled

State of Punjab and ors. vs.
Malagar Singh dismissed
vide Judgment dated
29.04.2024 (P-5).

5. Whether Constitutional No

validity of any Act,

Rule or Notification has

been challenged?

6. Whether sitting MP or No
MLA is involved?
 Through:

Place: Chandigarh (RANJIVAN SINGH)

P-1394/1995
Dated: 15.05.2024 NOR PH 224221
Advocate

(RIPUDAMAN SINGH ROOP)

P-1152/1993
NOR PH 224325
Advocate

(KANIKA TOOR) (RISHAM RAAG SINGH)

P-559/2012 PH-3351/2022
NOR PH 222496 Advocate
Advocate

Counsel for the Petitioner

 IN THE HON’BLE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH

CWP No. of 2024

Gurmel Singh

….. Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab and others

….. Respondents

Court Fee

Rs. 70.00/-

Through:

Place: Chandigarh (RANJIVAN SINGH)

P-1394/1995
Dated: 15.05.2024 NOR PH 224221
Advocate
Counsel for the Petitioner
LIST OF DATES AND EVENTS
ISSUE : That the petitioner, who is a Punjab

Government’s Retiree, is aggrieved by non-

grant of his Annual Increment notionally in

terms of Rule 4.7 of Punjab Civil Services Vol I

Part I as well as Judicial Pronouncements (P-1

and P-5).

23.11.197 : That the petitioner was appointed as PTI teacher

7 on 23.11.1977 in the Department of Education,

Punjab.

31.12.199 : That the petitioner retired on 31.12.1997 upon

7 attaining the age of superannuation.

The date of Annual Increment of the Petitioner

was fixed as 1st of January every year.

1998 : That the petitioner was duly granted the

pensionary/retiral benefits by way of allotting

PPO No. 110060/PB, however, despite

completing 12 months of service, he was not

granted the benefit of Annual Increment,

primarily on the ground that since the Petitioner

retired on 31.12.1997 and was not in service as

on 01.01.1998.

Consequently, the emoluments which he

was drawing on the last date of his service i.e.

31.12.1997 were taken in consideration for the

purpose of computing his pensionary benefits.

16.03.202 : That some similarly situated retirees Punjab

2 Government challenged the abovementioned

ground of denial of the grant of Annual Increment

in this Hon’ble Court by way of CWP No. 32598-

2019 which was allowed vide Judgment dated

 16.03.2022 (P-1) by directing the State of Punjab

to grant the petitioners the claimed benefit of

one Notional Increment so as to fix their last

drawn pay at the time of their retirement and

further to re-calculate their pensionary benefits

on the basis of the said last drawn pay within the

period of 3 months.

2022 : That when the petitioner approached the

departmental authorities for the grant of similar

relief, he was conveyed that the said benefit

could not be granted to him since he is not a

petitioner in any case.

22.02.202 : That in view of the above position, the petitioner

3 served a Legal Notice dated 22.02.2023 (P-2)

upon the respondents by way of Registered Post

(P-3), raising his claim.

18.04.202 : That in response, the Respondent No. 2 issued

3 Memo dated 18.04.2023 (P-4) to communicate

that against the said Judgment dated

16.03.2022 (P-1), the State of Punjab has filed

various LPAs. Accordingly, it was stated that the

claim of the Petitioner shall be considered after

the decision in the said LPAs.

09.04.202 : That it is noteworthy that the bunch of said

4 LPAs, has been dismissed by the Division Bench

of this Hon’ble Court vide its Judgment dated

09.04.2024 (P-5).

30.04.202 : That thereafter, the Petitioner apprised the said

4 factum of dismissal of the LPA vide Judgment

dated 09.04.2024 (P-5) to the Respondent –

 Department by way of a Supplementary Legal

Notice dated 30.04.2024 (P-6) and reiterated his

claim.

That since the issuance of the said

Supplementary Legal Notice dated 30.04.2024

(P-6), a period of almost 1 month has elapsed

but there is no response from the Respondent –

Department on the claim of the Petitioner.

The inaction on the part of the

Respondents by not acceding to the legitimate

claim of the Petitioner is not only illegal,

arbitrary, unjust but also in violation of Article

14 and 16 as it is a settled position of law that

once an issue has been settled by the Judicial

Pronouncement, then the similar relief be

granted to the similarly situated

person(s)/employees without forcing/compelling

him/her to knock the doors of the Courts time

and again.

Hence, the instant Civil Writ Petition is

being filed in this Hon’ble Court.

Through:

Place: Chandigarh (RANJIVAN S

Dated: 15.5.2024 Ad

(RIPUDAMAN SINGH R
Ad

(KANIKA TOOR) (RISHAM RAAG S

Advocate Advo
Counsel for the Petitioner
 SYNOPSIS

23.11.197 : That the petitioner was appointed as PTI teacher

7 on 23.11.1977 in the Department of Education,

Punjab.

31.12.199 : That the petitioner retired on 31.12.1997. The

7 date of Annual Increment of the Petitioner was

fixed as 1st of January every year.

1998 : That the petitioner was duly granted the

pensionary/retiral benefits, however, despite

completing 12 months of service, he was not

granted the benefit of Annual Increment,

primarily on the ground that he was not in

service as on 01.01.1998.

16.03.202 : That this Hon’ble Court vide Judgment dated

2 16.03.2022 (P-1) directed the State of Punjab to

(P-1) grant the benefit of one Notional Increment to its

Page 21- employees/retirees who completed 12 months of

38 service on 31st of December.

2022 : That the petitioner approached the

departmental authorities, where he was

conveyed that the said benefit could not be

granted to him since he is not a petitioner in any

case.

22.02.202 : That petitioner served a Legal Notice dated

3 22.02.2023 (P-2) raising his claim.

(P-2) (P-3)

Page 39-

43

18.04.202 : That in response, the Respondent No. 2 issued

3 Memo dated 18.04.2023 (P-4) to communicate

that against the said Judgment dated

 (P-4) 16.03.2022 (P-1), the State of Punjab has filed

Page 44 various LPAs and his claim shall be considered

after their decision.

09.04.202 : That the said LPAs, has been dismissed by this

4 Hon’ble Court vide its Judgment dated

(P-5) 09.04.2024 (P-5).

Page 45-

50

30.04.202 : That the Petitioner apprised the said factum of

4 dismissal of the LPA to the Respondents by way

(P-6) of a Supplementary Legal Notice dated

Page 51- 30.04.2024 (P-6).

53

15.05.202 That since the issuance of the said

4 Supplementary Legal Notice dated 30.04.2024

(P-6), a period of almost 1 month has elapsed

but there is no response from the Respondent.

The inaction on the part of the

Respondents is not only illegal, arbitrary, unjust

but also in violation of Article 14 and 16 as it is

a settled position of law that once an issue has

been settled by the Judicial Pronouncement,

then the similar relief be granted to the

similarly situated person(s)/employees.

Hence, the instant Civil Writ Petition is

being filed in this Hon’ble Court.

Through:

Place: Chandigarh (RANJIVAN S

Dated:15.5.2024 Ad
Counsel for the Petitioner
 ANNEXURE P-4

Office of Director of School Education (Secondary), Punjab, SAS Nagar

(Establishment – Branch 5)

Email I.D. dpuse.amla5@punjabeducation.gov.in

To,

Sh. Ranjivan Singh, Advocate

Kothi No. 2249, Phase – 10, SAS Nagar (Mohali)

roop.advocates@gmail.com

Memo No. 482376-12/09-2023 Establishment-5(1)/2023109309

Dated: S.A.S. Nagar:- 18.04.2023

Subject: Regarding Legal Notice dated 22.02.2023 on behalf of Sh.

Gurmel Singh, retired P.T.I.

With respect to the subject mentioned above, a claim has been

raised by you for the grant of Annual Increment in terms of the

Judgment dated 16.03.2022 as passed in CWP No. 32598 of 2019. In

this regard, it is informed that against the Judgment dated 16.03.2022

as passed in CWP No. 32598 of 2019 titled Sh. Gurdev Singh vs. State

of Punjab, the Department has preferred LPA No. 696 of 2022 in the

Hon’ble High Court, which is pending adjudication. The Department will

proceed/consider your claim in accordance with the decision of the

said LPA by the Hon’ble Court.

Sd/-

Superintendent

Establishment Branch -5

True Copy

(Advocate)