Disposed

Jeet Singh and Ors. v. State of Haryana and Ors.

Punjab & Haryana HC1 May 2012CWP/10090/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners sought enforcement of a legal notice claiming pay-scale benefits based on prior judgments. The court disposed of the petition by directing the respondent authority to decide the legal notice within three months and release benefits within two months thereafter.

What did the court decide?

Direction to respondent to decide legal notice within three months and release benefits within two months thereafter.

Jeet Singh and Ors. Vs State of… — Public Procurement and Tenders | Punjab & Haryana HC (2012)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶2

C.W.P.No.10090 of 2011 Date of Decision:- 01.05.2012

¶3

Jeet Singh and others

¶4

....Petitioner(s)

¶5

vs.

¶6

State of Haryana and others

¶7

....Respondent(s)

¶8

¶9

CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH

¶10

¶11

Present:Mr.Deepak Sonak, Advocate, for the petitioners.

¶12

Mr.Harish Rathee, Sr.DAG, Haryana.

¶13

¶14

AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH, J. (Oral)

¶15

Petitioners have approached this Court claiming grant of benefit of pay-scale of ` 4000-6000 as they are working on the technical posts to which they are entitled to as per the judgment passed by this Court in CWP No.5665 of 1991 titled as Ved Parkash and others vs. State of Haryana and another, decided on 11.05.2010. Reliance has also been placed upon a judgment of this Court passed in CWP No.5101 of 2009 Randhir Singh vs. State of Haryana and others, decided on 17.3.2010. Claiming the said benefit, petitioners have served a legal notice dated 20.4.2011 (Annexure P-10) on the respondents but no decision thereon has been conveyed to the petitioners till date.

¶16

Counsel for the petitioners states that the petitioners, at this stage, would be satisfied if a direction is issued to the Superintending Engineer, (PWD) Public Health Engineering Department, Ambala Circle,

¶17

C.W.P.No.10090 of 2011

¶18

-2-

¶19

Ambala Cantt-respondent No.3 to consider and decide the said legal notice within some specified time.

¶20

Counsel for the respondents does not have any objection to the prayer made by the counsel for the petitioners.

¶21

Without going into merits of the case or commenting thereon, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the Superintending Engineer, (PWD) Public Health Engineering Department, Ambala Circle, Ambala Cantt-respondent No.3 to consider and decide the legal notice dated 20.4.2011 (Annexure P-10) within a period of three months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. Decision so taken be conveyed to the petitioners forthwith.

¶22

In case the petitioners are held entitled to the consequential benefits, the same be released to them in accordance with law, within a period of two months thereafter.

¶23

May 01, 2012 ( AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH ) poonam JUDGE

Jeet Singh and Ors. v. State of Haryana and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jeet Singh and Ors. v. State of Haryana and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sushil Kumar Vs State of Haryana & Ors.

Geeta Devi Vs State of Haryana and Ors.

Karam Singh Vs State of Haryana and Ors.

Bhartari Vs State of Haryana and Ors.

Tara Chand Vs State of Haryana and Ors.

Mahender Singh and Ors. Vs State of Haryana and Ors.