Disposed

Satbir Singh v. Surina Rajan and Anr.

Punjab & Haryana HC11 Nov 2013COCP/1814/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a contempt petition regarding non-compliance with a prior promotion order, the court directed the respondents to reconsider the petitioner's claim for consequential benefits with retrospective effect from August 2009 and pass a speaking order within two months.

What did the court decide?

Respondents directed to reconsider claim for consequential benefits with retrospective effect from 28.8.2009 and pass speaking order within two months.

Satbir Singh Vs Surina Rajan and Anr. — Service and Employment | Punjab & Haryana HC (2013)

¶1

COCP 1814 of 2013

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.

¶4

COCP 1814 of 2013 Date of decision: 11.11.2013

Satbir Singh

.. petitioner

Surina Rajan and anr

¶9

... respondent

¶10

Present Mr. RS Sangwan, Advocate. Mr. RD Sharma, DAG, Haryana

¶11

M.M.S. BEDI,J.

¶12

Vide order dated 27.3.2012, a Coordinate Bench had issued a direction to the respondents to consider the claim of the petitioner for promotion to the post of Head Master, High School and promote him, if found eligible from the date his junior had been promoted i.e. 28.8.2009.

¶13

Through the present contempt petition, the petitioner has complained of non compliance of order dated 27.3.2012. When put to notice, the respondents has placed on record Order Annexure R-2, passed on the basis of order dated 27.3.2012, granting the relief of promotion to the petitioner to the post of Head Master in officiating capacity in the pay scale of Rs.9300-34800 plust grade pay of Rs.5400/- on provisional basis w.e.f. 28.8.2009, the date when the persons junior to him were promoted subject to the conditions mentioned in the order.

¶14

Counsel for the petitioner has submitted that vide condition No.1, the petitioner has been held entitled to notional benefits w.e.f. 28.8.2009 and actual benefits from the date of joining as a Head Master.

¶15

Mann Tapindar Singh 2013.11.25 10:33 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh

¶16

COCP 1814 of 2013

¶17

¶18

The petitioner has got an apprehension that all the consequential benefits, which the petitioner is entitled to will be deprived of under the term notional benefits.

¶19

I have considered the facts and circumstances of the case and I am of the opinion that as per directions dated 27.3.2012 the petitioner is entitled to all the consequential benefits on his promotion w.e.f. 28.8.2009. Taking into consideration the letter and spirit of order dated 27.3.2012, the respondents are directed to reconsider the claim of the petitioner for consequential benefits pursuant to his promotion from the retrospective date and a speaking order will be passed within a period of two months after the receipt of a certified copy of the order.

¶20

This petition is disposed of as having rendered ifnructuous with liberty to the petitioner to approach this court again in case the circumstances so warrant.

¶21

November 11 ,2013 ( M.M.S. BEDI ) TSM JUDGE

¶22

Mann Tapindar Singh 2013.11.25 10:33 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh

Satbir Singh v. Surina Rajan and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Satbir Singh v. Surina Rajan and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sukhdev Singh Vs Paramjit Singh Gill and Anr.

Babu Lal Vs D.S. Garewal

Kuldeep Singh Vs Sumesh Singh Saini & Ors.

Sarup Singh Vs Inder Mohan Singh

Kulwant Singh Vs Anjali Bhawra and Ors.

Manohar Lal Vs Rajender Singh Gahlot