Court noted the petitioner had received arrears for promotion to Clerk and confirmed he did not wish to press his petition. Consequently, the matter was summarily dismissed without further adjudication.
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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
COCP No. 2692 of 2012 (O&M) Date of decision: 2.3.2013
Satish Kumar
.. Petitioner
v.
Rohtas Singh Verma
.. Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BINDAL
Present: Mr. Pritam Saini, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. D. D. Gupta, Addl. Advocate General, Haryaana.
Rajesh Bindal J.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner in the present case has been paid arrears in terms of the order passed by this court on 8.2.2010 in CWP No. 16459 of 2000, as modified on 6.1.2012, for the period upto 31.1.2001. As the petitioner was promoted as Clerk on 27.5.2005, but with retrospective effect from 1.2.2001. He submitted that no financial benefits were granted for retrospective promotion as Clerk.
In view of the aforesaid facts, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that he does not wish to press the present petition.
Ordered accordingly.
(Rajesh Bindal) Judge
2.3.2013 mk
Satish Kumar
Rohtas Singh Verma
Rajesh Bindal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
