Disposed

Rohtash v. State of Haryana and Ors.

Punjab & Haryana HC29 Aug 2012CWP/16679/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought technical pay-scale revision. Court issued a direction to the respondent to consider a legal notice within four months and release benefits if entitlement is found within a further two months, without adjudicating merits.

What did the court decide?

Direction to respondent to decide legal notice within four months and release benefits if entitled within a further two months.

Rohtash Vs State of Haryana and Ors. — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Punjab & Haryana HC (2012)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶2

C.W.P.No.16679 of 2012 Date of Decision:- 29.08.2012

Rohtash

....Petitioner(s)

vs.

The State of Haryana and others

¶7

....Respondent(s)

¶8

¶9

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

¶10

¶11

Present:Mr.Arvind Kumar Yadav, Advocate, for the petitioner.

¶12

¶13

AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH, J. (Oral)

¶14

Petitioner has approached this Court with a grievance that despite he being serving the respondents on a technical post and fulfiling the mandate of the instructions dated 26.7.1991 (Annexure P-1) and the judgment passed by this Court in CWP No.18754 of 1991 Gurdev Singh and others vs. State of Haryana and others, on 18.1.2010, he has not been granted the technical pay-scale of ` 1200-2040 w.e.f.1.5.1990 and the consequential revision of pay.

¶15

Claiming the said benefit, petitioner has served a legal notice dated 12.6.2012 (Annexure P-4) upon the respondents but without any result.

¶16

Counsel contends that the petitioner, at this stage, would be satisfied if a direction is issued to respondent No.3-Sub Divisional Officer, W/S Mech.S/Division No.2, Rewari, to consider and decide the legal notice

¶17

C.W.P.No.16679 of 2012

¶18

-2-

¶19

dated 12.6.2012 (Annexure P-4) within some specified time.

¶20

Without going into merits of the case or commenting thereon, the present writ petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent No.3Sub Divisional Officer, W/S Mech.S/Division No.2, Rewari, to consider and decide the legal notice within a period of four months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. In case the petitioner is held entitled to the consequential benefits, the same shall be released to him within a further period of two months. If the claim of the petitioner is rejected, the same shall be by passing a speaking order and decision so taken be conveyed to the petitioner forthwith.

¶21

August 29, 2012 ( AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH ) poonam JUDGE

Rohtash v. State of Haryana and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rohtash 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

Bikram Singh and Ors. Vs U.T. of Chandigarh and Anr.

Balvir Singh Alias Bira Vs State of Punjab

Harinder Singh Rana & Ors. Vs Union of India & Anr.

Jai Parkash Sharma and Ors. Vs State of Haryana

Jasbir Singh Vs State of Punjab

Sumit Arora Vs State of Haryana and Ors.