Disposed

Manphool and Others v. State of Haryana and Anothers

Punjab & Haryana HC4 Dec 2014CWP/24849/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Punjab & Haryana held that the petitioners' grievances regarding exclusion from poverty line benefits due to revised state criteria shall be treated as a comprehensive representation, directing the State to dispose of it with a speaking order within four months.

What did the court decide?

Directing the respondents to treat this writ petition as a comprehensive representation and dispose of the same by passing a speaking order within four months.

Manphool and Others Vs State of… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Punjab & Haryana HC (2014)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶2

Civil Writ Petition No.24849 of 2014 Date of Decision: December 04, 2014

Manphool and others

.....Petitioners

versus

State of Haryana and another

¶7

.....Respondents

¶8

CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT.

¶9

HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAJ MOHAN SINGH.

¶10

Present: Mr.Ajay Vijarania, Advocate, for the petitioners. Mr.Vishal Garg, Additional AG, Haryana.

¶11

-.-

¶12

Whether Reporters of Local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?

¶13

To be referred to the Reporters or not?

¶14

Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?

¶15

¶16

Surya Kant, J. (Oral)

¶17

Notice of motion.

¶18

On our asking, Mr.Vishal Garg, learned Additional Advocate General, Haryana, accepts notice on behalf of the respondents.

¶19

Let two copies of the writ petition be supplied to the learned State counsel during the course of day failing which this order shall be automatically recalled and the writ petition shall be deemed to have been dismissed for nonprosecution.

¶20

In view of the nature of order which we propose to pass, there is no need to seek any counter-reply from the respondent at this stage.

¶21

The grievance of the petitioners is that due to the revised criteria introduced by the State Government, they have been excluded from the ambit of persons living below poverty line and are being deprived of the benefits of various social

¶22

MOHINDER KUMAR 2014.12.09 12:56 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

¶23

[2]

¶24

CWP No.24849 of 2014

¶25

welfare schemes including allotment of 100 square yard plots etc. The above-said issue has been raised by the petitioners vide their representation dated 06.01.2014 (Annexure P-2) also. It appears that finding no response thereto, the instant writ petition has been filed.

¶26

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considering the nature of relief sought by the petitioners, we dispose of this writ petition with a direction to the respondents to treat this writ petition as a comprehensive representation on behalf of the petitioners and dispose of the same by passing a speaking order and taking into consideration all the relevant factors, within a period of four months from the date of receiving a certified copy of this order.

¶27

Ordered accordingly. Dasti.

¶28

[SURYA KANT] JUDGE

¶29

December 04, 2014 [RAJ MOHAN SINGH] Mohinder JUDGE

¶30

MOHINDER KUMAR 2014.12.09 12:56 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

Manphool and Others v. State of Haryana and Anothers

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Manphool and Others v. State of Haryana and Anothers

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

Gurmail Singh and Ors. Vs Divisional Deputy Director and Anr.

Hari Singh & Ors. Vs Director Rural Dev. & Ors.

Food Corporation of India Vs Addl. Director Consolidation of Holding

Rakesh & Ors. Vs State of Haryana & Ors.

Mukhtar Masih Vs Union of India and Others

Kartar Singh and Ors. Vs State of Punjab and Ors.