Partly allowed

Murti Devi v. State of Haryana and Others

Punjab & Haryana HC20 Sept 2019CWP/18012/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought quashing of an order regularizing her services from 2005 instead of 2011. The court disposed of the petition directing the respondent to consider a legal notice and pass a reasoned order within two months.

What did the court decide?

Direction to respondent to decide legal notice dated 06.06.2019 within two months; costs of Rs.25,000 if not decided.

Murti Devi Vs State of Haryana and… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Punjab & Haryana HC (2019)

¶1

CWP No.18012 of 2019 (O&M)

¶2

{1}

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

CWP No.18012 of 2019 (O&M) Date of decision:20.09.2019

Murti Devi

... Petitioner

Vs.

State of Haryana and others

¶9

... Respondents

¶10

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL

¶11

Present:Mr. S.K.Malik, Advocate for the petitioner.

¶12

AMIT RAWAL J. (Oral)

¶13

C.M.No.12468 of 2019

¶14

The application is allowed, subject to all just exceptions. The documents, Annexure P-6 (colly), are taken on record.

¶15

CWP No.18012 of 2019

¶16

Prayer in present writ petition is for issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari quashing order dated 26.04.2018 (Annexure P-1) qua petitioner to the extent of date of regularization vide which her services have been regularized w.e.f. 01.04.2011 instead of 01.04.2005.

¶17

Notice of motion.

¶18

On asking of Court, Mr.R.K.Doon, Assistant Advocate General, Haryana, who is present in Court, accepts notice on behalf of respondents/State.

¶19

SAVITA KADIAN 2019.09.23 13:19 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh

¶20

CWP No.18012 of 2019 (O&M) {2}

¶21

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of petitioner submits that petitioner, at this stage, would be satisfied if a direction is issued to respondent no.3 to consider and decide the legal notice dated 06.06.2019 (Annexure P-4) in terms of Annexure P-6 (colly) within some specified time.

¶22

In view of statement made by learned counsel for the petitioner and without going into merit of case or commenting thereon, present writ petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent no.3 to decide the legal notice dated 06.06.2019 (Annexure P-4) in terms of Annexure P-6 (colly) by passing a well reasoned and speaking order within a period of two months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.

¶23

In case, legal notice is not decided within aforementioned specified time, there shall be costs of Rs.25,000/- to be paid by the concerned officer to the petitioner.

¶24

	(AMIT RAWAL) JUDGE
September 20, 2019 savita
Whether Speaking/Reasoned	Yes/No
Whether Reportable	Yes/No

¶25

SAVITA KADIAN 2019.09.23 13:19 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh

Murti Devi v. State of Haryana and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Murti Devi v. State of Haryana and Others

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

Nand Ram and Ors. Vs Mukesh Kumar and Ors.

Takdeer Vs State of Haryana and Others

Shri Pal Vs State of Haryana and Others

Ritika Vs State of Haryana and Others

Vikas Vs Arjun Singh Saini, the Director General

Charutta Sharma Vs Madan Singh and Ors.