Disposed

Balwinder Kumar v. State of Haryana & Ors.

Punjab & Haryana HC16 May 2012CWP/9238/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a public interest litigation, the High Court of Punjab and Haryana directed the General Manager, Haryana Roadways, Yamuna Nagar Depot, to consider the petitioner's representation for regularization of services within three months and decide within a further two months if entitled, without deciding the merits.

What did the court decide?

Direction to General Manager, Haryana Roadways, Yamuna Nagar Depot to consider petitioner's representation within three months and decide on entitlement and release of benefits within two months there

Balwinder Kumar Vs State of Haryana… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Punjab & Haryana HC (2012)

¶1

¶2

CWP No. 9238 of 2012

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.

¶4

CWP No. 9238 of 2012

¶5

Date of Decision : May 16, 2012

Balwinder Kumar

.... PETITIONER

Vs.

State of Haryana and others

¶10

..... RESPONDENTS

¶11

CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH

¶12

Present : Mr. I.D.Singla, Advocate, for the petitioner.

¶13

AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH, J. (ORAL)

¶14

Petitioner has approached this Court claiming the benefit of Rule 9 (1) (A) (g) read with Rule 13 (f) of the Haryana Transport Department (Group C) Haryana Roadways Service (Amendment) Rules, 2004, according to which, petitioner is entitled to regularization of his services on completion of 2 years service. It has further been contended that the petitioner was initially appointed on contractual basis by the General Manager, Haryana Roadways, Karnal vide order dated 26.02.2002. Petitioner was involved in an accident case and was transferred from Karnal Depot to Yamuna

¶15

CWP No. 9238 of 2012

¶16

¶17

Nagar Depot. His services were regularized in Yamuna Nagar Depot w.e.f. 30.07.2010 vide order dated 27.08.2010. A similarly placed driver, namely, Pala Ram, who was appointed along with the petitioner on contract basis in Karnal Depot, stands regularized w.e.f. 26.02.2006, in whose case also, a motor accident had taken place and was acquitted by giving him benefit of doubt as in the case of the petitioner. Petitioner contends that he is entitled to regularization of his services w.e.f. 26.02.2004 as per the statutory Rules and in any case, w.e.f. 26.02.2006 when similarly placed employee as the petitioner stands regularized. The only distinction between the petitioner and Pala Ram is that the petitioner was transferred from Karnal Depot to Yamuna Nagar Depot but that cannot be made the basis for giving the different date of regularization to the petitioner.

¶18

Claiming the benefit under the statutory Rules, petitioner has submitted a representation, copy of which has been appended as Annexure P-4 with the writ petition, to the General Manager, Haryana Roadways, Yamuna Nagar Depot, Yamuna Nagarrespondent No. 4 but till date, no decision thereon has been taken by respondent No. 4.

¶19

Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner at this stage would be satisfied if a direction is issued to the General Manager, Haryana Roadways, Yamuna Nagar Depot, Yamuna Nagar-respondent No. 4 to consider and decide the representation (Annexure P-4) within some specified time.

¶20

CWP No. 9238 of 2012

¶21

¶22

Without going into the merits of the case or commenting thereon, the present petition is disposed of with directions to the General Manager, Haryana Roadways, Yamuna Nagar Depot, Yamuna Nagar-respondent No. 4 to consider and decide the representation (Annexure P-4) within a period of three months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. The decision so taken be conveyed to the petitioner forthwith. In case the petitioner is held entitled to the claim made by him through his representation, the consequential benefits, if any, be released to the petitioner, in accordance with law, within a further period of two months.

¶23

(AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH ) JUDGE

¶24

May 16, 2012 pj

Balwinder Kumar v. State of Haryana & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Balwinder Kumar v. State of Haryana & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kamlesh and Anr. Vs State of Haryana and Ors.

Dinesh Vs State of Haryana & Ors.

M.R. Bansal Vs State of Haryana

Naresh Kumar Vs State of Haryana

Narinder Vs State of Haryana

Raj Pal Vs State of Haryana & Ors.