IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP No. 10127 of 1989 DATE OF DECISION: March 31, 2009 Gian Chand Singla and others …Petitioners Versus State of Punjab and others …Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M. KUMAR Present: Mr. Raj Paul Kansal, Advocate, for the petitioners. Ms. Sudeepti Sharma, DAG, Punjab, for the respondents. 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? M.M. KUMAR, J. The petitioners have claimed restoration of the benefit of one increment of higher responsibility with effect the dates mentioned in the writ petition. In the preliminary objection No. 1 taken in the written statement of respondent Nos. 1 to 4 it has been pointed out that the petitioners have already been granted one increment of higher responsibility from the date of entry into Master Cadre. They have also been paid arrears on account of one increment of higher responsibility restricting the arrears to 38 months from the date of filing of C.W.P. No. 3296 of 1987. However, the claim of the petitioners that they are entitled to arrears from the date of adjustment into Master’s cadre has been denied. C.W.P. No. 10127 of 1989 The aforesaid situation has arisen because the writ petition was admitted on 16.8.1989 whereas the written statement has been filed on 8.10.1990. The writ petition has been rendered infrustuous and disposed of as such. (M.M. KUMAR) March 31, 2009 JUDGE Pkapoor 2