LPA-37-2017 and connected cases

-1-

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH

1.

LPA-37-2017

Date of Decision: September 25, 2018

State of Punjab and others

.....Appellants

Versus

Jagjit Singh and others

......Respondent

2.

LPA-2320-2016

Jaswant Singh and others

......Appellant

Versus

The State of Punjab and others

......Respondents

3.

LPA-2310-2016

Charanjit Singh (Retd.) and others

....Appellants

Versus

State of Punjab and others

......Respondents

4.

LPA-06-2016

Gurdial Singh (Retd.) and others

.....Appellants

Versus

State of Punjab and others

.....Respondents

5.

LPA-496-2017

Rajinder Paul (Retd.) and others

.......Appellants

Versus

State of Punjab and others

......Respondent

6.

LPA-2465-2016

Rameshwar Dass, Retd. and others

......Appellants

Versus

State of Punjab and others

......Respondents

7.

LPA-2462-2016

Onkar Kumari

......Appellant

Versus

The State of Punjab and others

......Respondents

MEENU

2018.10.05 11:48

I attest to the accuracy and

authenticity of this document

chandigarh

LPA-37-2017 and connected cases

-2-

8.

LPA-397-2017

Kashmir Singh (Retd.) and others

......Appellants

Versus

State of Punjab and others

.......Respondents

9.

LPA-181-2017

Shital Ram

......Appellant

Versus

State of Punjab and others

......Respondents

CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDIP AHLUWALIA

Present:

Mr.Sandeep Vermani,Addl.AG, Punjab.

Mr.Harinder Sharma, Advocate

Mr.Sunny Singla, Advocate for the appellants.

Mr.M.S.Rana, Advocate for the appellants in LPA-181-2017

Mr.S.K.Rattan, Advocate for the appellants in LPA-2320 and

2462-2016.

........

SURYA KANT, J.(ORAL)

CM-56-LPA-2017

For the reasons mentioned in the application, the same is

allowed and delay of 58 days in filing the appeal is condoned.

CM stands disposed of.

LPA-37-2017

This order shall dispose of the above captioned Letters Patent

Appeals as the point in issue involved in all the cases is common in nature.

For the sake of convenience, the facts are being extracted from LPA-37-

2017.

MEENU

2018.10.05 11:48

I attest to the accuracy and

authenticity of this document

chandigarh

LPA-37-2017 and connected cases

-3-

[2]

State of Punjab has preferred this Letters Patent Appeal against

the decision dated 09.09.2016 of the learned Single Judge whereby the order

dated 20.10.2014 was set aside and a direction has been issued to fix the

pension and retiral benefits of the respondents “on the basis of last pay

drawn

by

them

in

their

officiating

capacity

as

Principal/Headmaster/Headmistresses except petitioners Nos.5, 6 and 16 as

the State is not opposing their claim.” In other words, the learned Single

Judge has held that out of 17 writ petitioners, three had been promoted as

Principal/ Headmaster/ Headmistresses on regular basis and the State

conceded their claim for fixation of pension and other retiral benefits as per

the last pay drawn by them. In respect of remaining 14 writ petitioners,

learned Single Judge has found that since they were also officiating as

Principal/ Headmaster/ Headmistresses, they are entitled to pension and

other retiral benefits as per the last pay drawn by them on such higher posts.

[3]

It is not necessary to mention further facts in extenso as a brief

reference to the relevant facts has been already given in the judgment dated

23.05.2017 rendered in LPA-681-2017 (State of Punjab and another vs

Sukhminder Singh and others) and other connected cases, in which

Review application bearing RA-LP-35-2017 has also been disposed of vide

order dated 31.08.2018. Suffice to mention that several posts of Principal/

Headmaster/Headmistresses meant to be filled up by promotion from

amongst Lecturer/ Master/Mistresses are lying vacant and the promotion

quota has not been exhausted apparently for the reasons like pendency of

seniority dispute. Since regular promotion could not be made, most of the

senior most persons were asked to officiate