Karuna Singla vs State of Punjab and Others

Ajay Tewari, J.—Notice of motion. Ms. Kavita Arora, learned AAG, Punjab accepts notice on behalf of the respondents.

Learned counsel for the petitioner undertakes to supply four copies of the petition to the learned AAG during the course of the day failing which the order shall be automatically recalled and the writ petition shall be deemed to have been dismissed for non-prosecution.

Having regard to the nature of order which I propose to pass, there is no necessity to call upon the respondents to file their counter-reply (ies)/affidavit(s), at this stage.

The claim of the petitioner in this writ petition is for granting basic pay of the higher posts against which he worked, in terms of the decision of this Court in CWP No. 10454 of 2011, titled as Bhim Sain and others vs. State of Punjab and another, decided on 02.06.2011.

During the course of hearing, learned counsel for the parties are ad-idem that the controversy involved in this case is squarely covered by the decision of this Court rendered in CWP No. 9023 of 2012, Charan Singh and others vs. State of Punjab and others, decided on 15.05.2012.

In these circumstances, this writ petition is disposed of in the same terms as in CWP No. 9023 of 2012. Necessary exercise be carried out within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. A copy of this order be given to the learned AAG under the signatures of the Court Secretary.