IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No.16694 of 2010 Date of Decision: September 16, 2010 Darshan Kumar .....PETITIONER(S) VERSUS State of Punjab & Others .....RESPONDENT(S) . . . CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAI LAMBA PRESENT: - Mr. J.S. Lalli, Advocate, for the petitioner(s). . . . AJAI LAMBA, J (Oral) 1. This civil writ 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 Order dated 11.9.2006 (Annexure P-1). Further prayer made in the petition is that action of the respondents in directing recovery from the petitioner be quashed in view of decision rendered by Full Bench of this Court in Budh Ram & Others vs. State of Haryana & Others (Civil Writ Petition No.2799 of 2008, decided on 22.5.2009) reported as 2009(3) PLR 511. 2. Perusal of Order, Annexure P-1, CWP No.16694 of 2010 [2] indicates that it has been held by the respondents that the petitioner is not entitled to proficiency step up on completion of 18 years of service and therefore, the pay is refixed. 3. Notice of motion. 4. On the asking of the Court, Mr. Parveen Chander Goyal, Additional 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. 5. 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. 6. Learned counsel for the respondent- State contends that the Committee constituted by this Court while dealing with Civil Writ Petition No.18754 of 2007 titled `Amarjit Singh vs. State of Punjab & Others’, decided on 31.3.2010, would also consider the case of the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that he would have no objection if the case of the petitioner is considered by the Committee constituted for the said purpose under orders passed by this Court in Amarjit Singh’s case (supra). CWP No.16694 of 2010 [3] 7. In view of the above, this petition is disposed of in terms of judgment dated 31.3.2010 rendered by this Court in Civil Writ Petition No.18754 of 2007 titled `Amarjit Singh vs. State of Punjab & Others’. (AJAI LAMBA) September 16, 2010 JUDGE avin 1. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 2. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?