SAROJ BALA vs STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS — CWP/35350/2025

Case under Constitution of India Section 226/227. Disposed: --DISMISSED on 11th May 2026.

Case disposed Next hearing 13-Jan-2026

CNR: PHHC011909362025

e-Filing Number

21-11-2025

Filing Number

CWP/74457/2025

Filing Date

26-Nov-2025

Registration No

CWP/35350/2025

Registration Date

26-Nov-2025

Judge

Mr. Justice Namit Kumar

Coram

Mr. Justice Namit Kumar

Bench Type

Single

Category

68.11 - SERVICE-SECONDARY EDU-PUNJAB (PGT) ( 772 )

Judicial Branch

WRITS -I BRANCH

Decision Date

11-May-2026

Nature of Disposal

--DISMISSED

Last updated 01-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

Constitution of India Section 226/227

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.SAROJ BALA

    Adv. SUNNY SINGLA

  2. 2.Saroj bala

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS

  2. 2.State of Punjab and others

  3. 3.Secretary to government of Punjab department of school education

  4. 4.Director school education secondary punjab

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 11-May-2026

    Mr. Justice Namit KumarView PDF

    Case Summary: CWP/35350/2025 - Saroj Bala v. State of Punjab Saroj Bala sought arrears of revised pay withheld by Punjab authorities, claiming the state violated a prior 2024 court order entitling her to consequential benefits from service credited under Rule 4.4 of Punjab Civil Service Rules. Upon the court questioning the maintainability of the petition (given an earlier identical writ had already been allowed), the petitioner's counsel requested withdrawal with liberty to pursue other legal remedies, which the court granted by dismissing the petition as withdrawn. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 26-Nov-2025

    Case filed

    Registration No. CWP/35350/2025

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: CWP/35350/2025 - Saroj Bala v. State of Punjab Saroj Bala sought arrears of revised pay withheld by Punjab authorities, claiming the state violated a prior 2024 court order entitling her to consequential benefits from service credited under Rule 4.4 of Punjab Civil Service Rules. Upon the court questioning the maintainability of the petition (given an earlier identical writ had already been allowed), the petitioner's counsel requested withdrawal with liberty to pursue other legal remedies, which the court granted by dismissing the petition as withdrawn. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case