Disposed

Hoshiyar Singh & Anr. v. State of Haryana & Ors.

Punjab & Haryana HC24 Sept 2016LPA/1866/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court Bench disposed of an appeal challenging the dismissal of a writ petition wherein the Single Judge denied relaxation in rules for type-test qualification. Unlike in Lal Chand where rules were relaxed for an appellant near retirement, this Bench remitted the matter to the Department to sympathetically consider the appellants' claims accordingly.

What did the court decide?

Matter remitted to authorities to consider the appellants' claim for relaxation in rules sympathetically within four months.

Hoshiyar Singh & Anr. Vs State of… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Punjab & Haryana HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶2

Letters Patent Appeal No.1866 of 2016 (O&M) Date of Decision: September 24, 2016

¶3

Hoshiyar Singh and another ......Appellants

¶4

versus

¶5

State of Haryana and others .....Respondents

¶6

CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT. HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SUDIP AHLUWALIA.

¶7

*******

¶8

Present: Mr.Vivek Khatri, Advocate, for the appellants.

¶9

-.-

¶10

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

¶11

To be referred to the Reporters or not?

¶12

Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?

¶13

¶14

Surya Kant, J . (Oral)

¶15

The appellants have laid challenge to the order dated 31.08.2016 whereby learned Single Judge dismissed their writ petition and has approved the department's order to the effect that the appellants are required to qualify the type-test to become eligible for the grant of annual increments.

¶16

Learned Single Judge has held so keeping in view the fact that a specific condition was incorporated in the promotion order of the appellants when they were brought from Class-IV to Class-III establishment and it is expressly required in the statutory rules also that unless the appellants qualify the type-test, they cannot earn the annual increment.

¶17

Somewhat identical situation arose for our consideration in

¶18

LPA No.847 of 2012 (Lal Chand versus State of Haryana and others) which

¶19

Mohinder Kumar Kamboj 2016.10.17 12:01 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh

¶20

LPA No.1866 of 2016 (O&M)

¶21

[2]

¶22

was disposed of vide order dated 01.08.2013 in the following terms:-

¶23

“..... We are informed that the appellant joined the Department as a Class-IV employee and was promoted as Clerk when he was near the age of retirement. The appellant has meanwhile retired from service. That can be a factor to persuade the Competent Authority to grant relaxation in the Rules, may be prospectively, which would enable the appellant to draw higher pension and other retiral benefits only.

¶24

As observed earlier, the decision to relax the Rules can be taken by the authorities with whom such power is vested under the Rules.

¶25

Consequently, we dispose of this appeal by modifying the order of learned Single Judge to the extent that the respondents may consider the appellant's claim for relaxation in Rules sympathetically and pass an appropriate order within a period of four months from the date a certified copy of this order is received......”

¶26

The instant appeal is accordingly disposed of in the above-

¶27

terms.

¶28

September 24, 2016	[SUDIP AHLUWALIA]
mohinder	JUDGE
Whether speaking/reasoned	: Yes/No
Whether Reportable	: Yes/No

¶29

Mohinder Kumar Kamboj 2016.10.17 12:01 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh

Hoshiyar Singh & Anr. v. State of Haryana & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hoshiyar Singh & Anr. v. State of Haryana & 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

Amit Chouhan and Others Vs State of Haryana and Others

Dayanand Nagar Vs State of Haryana and Ors.

Chandi and Ors. Vs National Highway Authority of India and Ors.

Sukhvir and Ors. Vs State of Haryana and Ors.

Dinesh and Ors. Vs National Highway Authority of India and Ors.

Natthi and Ors. Vs State of Haryana and Ors.