STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS Vs. RULDU RAM AND OTHERS
LAWS(P&H)-1990-7-100
HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
Decided on July 24,1990

State of Punjab and Others Appellant
VERSUS
Ruldu Ram And Others Respondents

JUDGEMENT

R.S. Mongia, J. - (1.) This is a letters patent appeal under Clause X of the Letters Patent, against the judgment of learned Single Judge, dated 4th January, 1989, in which directions were given to the State of Punjab to consider the case of the petitioners for protecting their pay in view of the policy decision and the instructions of the State Government.
(2.) The brief facts giving rise to this appeal are that the petitioners were employed with the Mukerian Hydel Project Power House, Talwara Township, in different trades. Before their being absorbed in the said Project, the petitioners were working in various other Projects such as Beas Sutlej Link, Beas Construction, Talwara and Beas Dam Project, Shah Nehar. After the completion of the projects referred to above, the petitioners were retrenched from service and were given retrenchment compensation. Subsequently, they were given fresh appointments under the Mukerian Hydel Project Power House, at the basic pay of the pay scale of the post. One of the letters of appointment has been attached by the State Government as Annexure R-l with its written statement. It was mentioned in the letter of appointment that fresh appointment has no concern with the service rendered by an employee in any other establishment in the past and no claim for enhancement of the initial pay would ever be entertained on account of any experience or the last pay drawn in some other establishment.
(3.) The petitioners as well as their Union represented to the Authorities that their pay should have been protected and they should have been allowed to draw the same salary as they were drawing in the other projects. It is stated that the officers recommended the case of the petitioners for protecting their salary and even a policy decision in the matter was taken but despite that the salary of the petitioners was not protected. Consequently, the petitioners approached this Court by way of writ petition seeking a Mandamus to be issued to the respondents to decide their case and to award them the same benefits as per the policy decision taken from time to time.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.