IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH LPA-1339-2026 (O&M)

Date of Decision:- 18.05.2026 STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS ....Appellants Vs.

MONICA SAINI ...Respondent CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASGURPREET SINGH PURI HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE AMARJOT BHATTI Present:- Ms.Arunadhati Kulshreshtha, AAG, Punjab.

*****

JASGURPREET SINGH PURI, J. (ORAL)

CM-3258-2026

1. The present is an application under Section 5 of Limitation Act, 1963 for condonation of delay of 546 days in filing of the present appeal.

2. Learned Assistant Advocate General for the State, while referring to the grounds taken in the aforesaid application, submitted that although there is a delay of 546 days in filing the present Letters Patent Appeal, the same has occurred on account of various steps being taken towards obtaining legal opinion from different authorities in filing the present appeal. She further submitted that after the receipt of the judgment passed by the learned Single Judge, a legal opinion was sought from the office of the Advocate General, Punjab, and thereafter, the matter was sent to the Department of Finance, Punjab, being the competent authority to take an appropriate decision in this regard.

3. Thereafter, approval was granted by the aforesaid department for filing the present appeal, and the draft LPA was sent to the Secretary to Government of Punjab, Department of Health and Family Welfare, Punjab, for approval. Thereafter, directions were issued by the Government to file the appeal, and the draft LPA was sent to the office of learned Advocate General, Punjab, for vetting. The learned Advocate General raised various objections and made certain corrections in the draft, thereafter the same was again sent back to the Government for taking further necessary actions.

4. After incorporating the amendments and suggestions as advised by the office of the Advocate General, Punjab, the draft was again sent to the Government for approval and thereafter forwarded for vetting. It was on account of the aforesaid necessary procedural formalities and completion of paperwork that the present LPA could not be filed within the prescribed time. Therefore, the delay of 546 days caused in filing the appeal is neither intentional nor wilful and deserves to be condoned. She also submitted that in case delay is not condoned then it may cause financial loss to the Government and on this ground as well, delay may be condoned.

5. We have heard learned Assistant Advocate General, Punjab. A perusal of the application, as well as the submissions made by the learned Assistant Advocate General, makes it clear that there is a huge delay of 546 days, which has occurred on account of procedural communication between different departments of the State for seeking opinions and approval of the draft LPA. The delay was merely caused due to inter-

departmental communication and procedural formalities.

6. An argument was raised by learned Assistant Advocate General that financial implication would be involved in case delay is not condoned. The learned Single Judge has allowed the writ petition on the ground that when the advertisement was issued, grade pay to the post of Psychiatrist Social Worker was Rs.3800/- but after issuance of advertisement, vide notification dated 21.12.2011 grade pay of the post was revised to be Rs.4200/- w.e.f. 01.12.2011. The said fact is clear from the notification dated (Annexure P-3), which has been conceded by the respondent – State. Once, the pay sale of the post on which the petitioners were recruited underwent a change, the respondents were under an obligation to grant the revised pay scale, which existed in the Rules governing the service on the date when the petitioners were appointed. It has also come in the judgment passed by learned Single Judge, other employees, who were working in the department on the same post were getting grade pay of Rs.4200/-. Therefore, the aforesaid argument raised by learned Assistant Advocate General appearing on