Disposed

Yog Raj and Ors. v. State of Haryana and Ors.

Punjab & Haryana HC10 Apr 2013CWP/7728/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition, displaced persons sought a direction for the Government to expedite disposal of their rehabilitation claim under the Displaced Persons Act, citing prior pending litigation and a representation filed earlier. The Court issued a time-bound direction for a speaking order within four months.

What did the court decide?

Direction to respondents to consider and decide the petitioners combined representation within four months of receipt of certified copy of this order by passing a speaking order.

Yog Raj and Ors. Vs State of… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Punjab & Haryana HC (2013)

¶1

CWP No.7728 of 2013

¶2

-1-

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

¶5

CWP No.7728 of 2013 DATE OF DECISION : 10.04.2013

Yog Raj and others

....Petitioners

Versus

State of Haryana and others

¶10

...Respondents

¶11

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV NARAIN RAINA

¶12

Present : Mr. Manoj Kaushik, Advocate, for the petitioners.

¶13

RAJIV NARAIN RAINA, J. (ORAL)

¶14

The petitioners before this Court claim that they are displaced persons, who have rights under the Displaced Persons (Compensation & Rehabilitation) Act, 1954. They claim that similarly situated displaced persons had approached this Court by filing writ petition including CWP No.11214 of 2010, which was decided by the learned Single Judge of this Court on 29.06.2010 (P-4). In the wake of this order, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the matter is at an advance stage of conclusion in the hands of the Government but has not been resolved despite long passage of time and thus the petitioners have made a representation for expeditious disposal on 15.02.2012 (P-3). Over a year has gone by and no final decision has been taken. Learned counsel submits that this is an appropriate case where a direction should go to the respondent-State to consider the cases of the petitioners as well together with the pending cases of other similarly situated displaced persons and their cases be also tagged with the pending matters for final decision by the Government.

¶15

Learned counsel further submits that the petitioners would be satisfied if a time bound direction is issued to the Government calling upon the decision making authority to consider and decide the petitioners'

¶16

CWP No.7728 of 2013 -2-

¶17

representation (P-3), keeping in view the decision of the learned Single Judge in the aforesaid writ petition and in the light of other relevant material available with them to speedily give effect to the scheme of rehabilitation.

¶18

In view of the nature of the order proposed to be passed, it is not necessary to issue notice to the respondents and it would suffice that a direction should go to the respondents to consider and decide the petitioners' representation (P-3) within a period of four months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order by passing a speaking order. In case, the proposed decision to be taken is adverse to the petitioners, they would then be afforded hearing either individually or through their counsel at the discretion of the competent authority. Needless to say that the final decision would be a speaking one containing reasons.

¶19

10.04.2013 adhikari

¶20

(RAJIV NARAIN RAINA) JUDGE

Yog Raj and Ors. v. State of Haryana and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Yog Raj and Ors. 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

Ghanshyam Singh Vs Presiding Officer & Ors.

Mehar Singh Vs State of Hy.

Sukhdev Singh Vs the State of Punjab

Reena Rani and Anr. Vs Chief Registrar, Marriages and Ors.

Paramjit Singh Vs State of Punjab and Others

Ram Niwas Vs State of Haryana and Ors.