IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No.21777 of 2010 Date of Decision: December 07, 2010 Gurpreet Kaur .....PETITIONER(S) VERSUS State of Punjab and others .....RESPONDENT(S) . . . CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAI LAMBA PRESENT: - Mr. R.K. Arora, Advocate, for the petitioner. . . . AJAI LAMBA, J (Oral) 1. This petition has been filed under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India, praying for issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari, quashing Letter dated 29.4.2010 (Annexure P-6) vide which pay of the petitioner has been refixed on account of withdrawal of increment of higher responsibility given to her at the time of promotion and due to postponing of date of proficiency step up. Resultant recovery has been ordered. 2. Notice of motion. 3. On the asking of the Court, CWP No.21777 of 2010 [2] Mr. B.S. Chahal, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab, accepts notice on behalf of the respondents. Requisite number of copies of the writ petition have been handed over to learned counsel for the respondents in Court. 4. On request of learned counsel for the parties, the matter is taken up at this stage itself for final adjudication in view of the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case. 5. Learned counsel for the parties agree that the matter can be referred to the Committee constituted under Orders of this Court while dealing with Civil Writ Petition No.16323 of 2008 titled `Smt. Sudarshana Devi & another vs. State of Punjab & others’, decided on 2.3.2010. 6. In view of the common prayer made by learned counsel for the parties, the petition is disposed of in terms of judgment dated 2.3.2010 rendered by this Court in Civil Writ Petition No.16323 of 2008 titled `Smt. Sudarshana Devi & another vs. State of Punjab & others’. (AJAI LAMBA) December 07, 2010 JUDGE avin 1. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 2. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?