DARSHAN LAL Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is employed as Works Mistry in the Muke-rian Hydel Project. Before his absorption in Mukerian Hydel Project, he was working under the employment of Bhakra Beas Management Board and on the completion of Be as Construction Board, the petitioner was reverenced from service and was given retrenchment compensation. Subsequently, he was given fresh appointment in Mukerian Hydel Project and the service rendered by the petitioner with the Bhakra Beas Management Board was not counted towards seniority and he was given an initial start pay in the project. The grievance of the petitioner is that on his absorption in the new project i.e. Mukerian Hydel Project, his pay has not been protected. The petitioner has prayed in this writ petition for issuance of a direction to the respondents to pay him the same salary which he. was drawing from his erstwhile employer. The Counsel for the petitioner has relied upon this courts judgment rendered in C.W.P. No. 2360 of 1986 Ruldu Ram Vs. State of Punjab, decided on 4.1.1989 . It has been brought to the notice of the Court that against the aforesaid judgment, L.P.A. filed by the respondents has also been dismissed.

(2.) I have perused the paper-book, gone through the judgment and From that the matter is squarely covered by this Courts judgment dated 4.1.1989, wherein a direction was issued that the pay of the petitioner should have been protected and he should have been given the same salary as he was drawing in the past.

(3.) The writ petition is consequently allowed in the terms of the aforesaid judgment with no order as to costs. Petition allowed.