SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(P&H) 5834

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
MANJINDER SINGH – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS – Respondent



233 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of decision : 10.03.2026 Sub-Inspector Manjinder Singh ...Petitioner Versus State of Punjab and others ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPINDER SINGH NALWA Present: Mr. Kamaldip Singh Sidhu, Advocate and Ms. Kirandeep Kaur, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Amarpreet Singh Bains, AAG, Punjab.

*****

DEEPINDER SINGH NALWA, J. (Oral)

In the present writ petition, the petitioner is praying for issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing the order dated 01.07.2019 (Annexure P-7) and order dated 23.10.2019 (Annexure P- 10) whereby the claim of the petitioner for refixation of his pay was rejected.

2. A perusal of the writ petition would show that as per the petitioner, the respondents have taken into consideration the date of promotion of the petitioner on the post of Head Constable from promotion list C-II as 09.09.1996 instead of 09.09.1994. As such, if promotion list C-II is taken as 09.09.1994, the pay of the petitioner has to be refixed and he would be entitled for all consequential benefits.

3. Additional affidavit dated 04.05.2023 of Balbir Singh, PPS, Assistant Inspector General Zonal, CID, Ferozepur, has been filed on behalf of respondents No.1 to 6. A perusal thereof would show that promotion list C-II is taken as 09.09.1994 and not 09.09.1996.

4. Taking into consideration the stand taken by respondents No.1 to 6 in the abovesaid affidavit, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he will be satisfied, if liberty is granted to the petitioner to file a representation seeking details as to on what basis the pay-scale of the petitioner has been refixed while taking into consideration the date of promotion of the petitioner on the post of Head Constable from promotion list C-II as 09.09.1994 and a direction be given to respondent No.4 to decide such representation submitted by the petitioner in a time-bound manner.

5. Learned State counsel does not oppose the prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioner.

6. In view of the above and without commenting upon the merits of the case, the present petition is hereby disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to file a representation seeking details as to how the pay-scale of the petitioner has been refixed while taking into Head Constable from promotion list C-II as 09.09.1994. In case, such a representation is filed by the petitioner, the same shall be considered and decided by respondent No.4, in accordance with law, within a period of 02 months from the date of submission of such representation by the petitioner.

7. Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand(s) disposed of.

10.03.2026 (DEEPINDER SINGH NALWA)

JUDGE d.gulati Whether speaking / reasoned : Yes No Whether Reportable : Yes No

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top