Disposed

Ram Awadh v. State of Punjab and Ors.

Punjab & Haryana HC24 May 2013CWP/11485/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This writ petition addressed the petitioner's grievance regarding the failure to regularize his services from his actual appointment date (1.12.1984) instead of an incorrect date (1.6.1995). The High Court disposed of the petition by directing the Superintending Engineer to decide the petitioner's legal notice within four months and pass a reasoned order if the claim is rejected.

What did the court decide?

Direction to Respondent No.2 to decide the legal notice within four months and pass a speaking order if rejected.

Ram Awadh Vs State of Punjab and Ors. — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Punjab & Haryana HC (2013)

¶1

Civil Writ Petition No.11485 of 2013 { 1 }

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶3

Date of Decision: May 24, 2013

Ram Awadh

...Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab & others

¶8

...Respondents

¶9

CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH

¶10

Present: Mr.V.K.Shukla, Advocate, for the petitioner.

¶11

¶12

AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH, J.(ORAL)

¶13

Petitioner has approached this Court with a grievance that his actual service has not been taken into consideration by the respondents while regularising his services w.e.f. 10.5.2002. As a matter of fact, he was required to be considered and regularised w.e.f. 1.12.1984 in the light of the policy instructions issued by the respondents with regard to regularisation of services dated 23.1.1995 (Annexure P-1).

¶14

Petitioner has asserted that he was appointed on daily wages as Mali-cum-Chowkidar on 1.12.1984. As per the policy instructions dated 23.1.1995 (Annexure P-1), an employee who had completed ten years of service on 30.11.1994 was entitled to be regularised. The case of the petitioner for regularisation of his

¶15

Civil Writ Petition No.11485 of 2013 { 2 }

¶16

services was forwarded by respondent No.3-Executive Engineer, Water Supply and Sanitation Division, Moga. Inadvertently, the date of appointment of the petitioner was mentioned as 1.6.1995, whereas it should have been 1.12.1984. Had the correct date been mentioned, the petitioner would have been regularised in service w.e.f. 1.12.1984. By realising the mistake committed in forwarding the claim of the petitioner, respondent No.3, vide Memo dated 1.10.2011 (Annexure P-4), clarified to the Superintending Engineer, Department of Water Supply and Sanitation (Monitoring) Branch, Head Office, Patiala-respondent No.2 with regard to the date of appointment of the petitioner and accordingly stated that he should have been considered for regularisation of the services from the date he is actually entitled to. No action thereon was taken by the respondents and, therefore, the petitioner has served a legal notice dated 2.1.2013 (Annexure P-7) upon the respondents, which has, till date, not been decided.

¶17

Counsel contends that the petitioner, at this stage, would be satisfied if a direction is issued to respondent No.2Superintending Engineer, Department of Water Supply and Sanitation (Monitoring) Branch, Head Office, Patiala to consider and decide the legal notice dated 2.1.2013 (Annexure P-7) served by the petitioner, within some specified time.

¶18

In view of the statement made by the counsel for the petitioner and without going into the merit of the case or commenting

¶19

Civil Writ Petition No.11485 of 2013 { 3 }

¶20

thereon, the present writ petition is disposed of with direction to respondent No.2-Superintending Engineer, Department of Water Supply and Sanitation (Monitoring) Branch, Head Office, Patiala to consider and decide the legal notice dated 2.1.2013 (Annexure P-7) within a period of four months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.

¶21

In case the claim of the petitioner is not to be accepted, then a well reasoned and speaking order be passed and conveyed to the petitioner forthwith.

¶22

May 24, 2013 ( AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH ) ramesh JUDGE

Ram Awadh v. State of Punjab and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ram Awadh v. State of Punjab and Ors.

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

Sharnjot Singh Vs State of Punjab and Ors.

P.J. Singh Vs Union of India and Ors.

Major I.J.S.Bhatia Vs Union of India & Anr.

Mohinder Singh Vs State of Punjab & Ors.

Paramjit Kaur Vs State of Punjab and Others

Varinder Kaur Vs State of Punjab and Anr.