Usha Rani v. State of Haryana
Case brief
What is this about?
Judge dismissed a civil writ petition for service regularization as the petitioner had successfully secured a regular post during the pendency, leaving no further cause of action.
Judge dismissed a civil writ petition for service regularization as the petitioner had successfully secured a regular post during the pendency, leaving no further cause of action.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Civil Writ Petition No. 9311 of 1993
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Civil Writ Petition No. 9311 of 1993 Date of decision : 14.07.2011
Usha Rani
....Petitioner
V/s
State of Haryana and others
....Respondents
BEFORE : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJAN GUPTA
Present: Mr. Daldeep Singh, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. Rajesh Garg, Additional Advocate General, Haryana.
RAJAN GUPTA J. (ORAL)
In the instant petition, the petitioner has sought a direction to respondents to regularise her service as steno-typist.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits at the outset that during pendency of this petition, the petitioner has been selected as a Section Officer (SAS cadre) through a regular selection process. He, thus, submits that petitioner does not press the prayer for regularization of her post as steno-typist any longer. However, in view of the fact that petitioner worked with the respondents as steno-typist for a considerable period pursuant to interim order dated August 04, 1993 passed by this court, salary/emoluments drawn by her for the said period may not be withdrawn by the respondents.
Civil Writ Petition No. 9311 of 1993
2
Learned State counsel submits that there is no proposal whatsoever to withdraw the salary etc. paid to the petitioner for the period she worked as steno-typist under interim order of this court.
In view of above, no further orders are required to be passed by this court. It appears that no cause of action survives in the present petition.
Disposed of.
July 14, 2011 (RAJAN GUPTA) Ajay JUDGE
Usha Rani
State of Haryana
Rajan Gupta
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court