CWP No. 12466 of 1999 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP No. 12466 of 1999 Date of Decision: 13.08.2010 B.M.Hans ...Petitioner Vs. State of Punjab & Ors. ...Respondents CORAM Hon'ble Mr.Justice Vinod K.Sharma Present: Mr.B.M.Singh, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr.Rajesh Garg, Advocate, for respondent No.3. Vinod K.Sharma, J . (Oral) The petitioner has invoked the writ jurisdiction of this court under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, seeking a writ in the nature of mandamus, for directing the respondent/Management to grant annual increments to the petitioner right from the date of his appointment till retirement, and the payment of arrears etc. as the petitioner was appointed, against permanent post. In spite of representation made by the petitioner no deduction from his salary towards employees contribution fund was made, though the petitioner was a confirmed employee. The petitioner was entitled to revised pay scale as per revisions of pay scales on 1.1.1996, 1.1.1996 and 1.1.2006 with consequential retiral benefits after fixation of salary in the higher grade. CWP No. 12466 of 1999 2 Writ petition has been opposed by the learned counsel for respondent No.3 on the ground, that prior to the filing of this writ petition the petitioner has filed a civil suit claiming similar relief. Therefore, this writ petition was not maintainable, as the petitioner cannot avail two remedies simultaneously, for the same relief. The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner was, that in the civil suit, limited relief was claimed. This contention of the learned counsel cannot be accepted as the petitioner could claim the relief claimed, in the writ petition by amending the civil suit. In view of the stand taken by the learned counsel for the respondent, the learned counsel for the petitioner wants to withdraw this writ, and move application under Order 6 Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure for amending the plaint to claim all the reliefs due to the petitioner in the pending suit. Keeping in view the fact, that the petitioner was prosecuting his remedy in this court, and writ petition was admitted in the year 1999, and was kept pending in this court, learned trial court is directed to allow the application if moved by the petitioner under Order 6 Rule 17 of the Code for the amendment of the plaint to claim all the dues, including the one raised in this writ petition, so as to finally adjudicate all the disputes between the parties. Dismissed as withdrawn, however, liberty granted to the petitioner to seek relief claimed in this writ petition, by amending the pending suit. 13.08.2010 (Vinod K.Sharma) rp Judge