Disposed

Minakshi Devi v. State of Haryana and Others

Punjab & Haryana HC24 Sept 2020CWP/12864/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a CWP, a petition transfer officer directed the Department of Secondary Education, Haryana, to consider a representation by the petitioner, a transferred government employee, for compassionate retention or concession to care for her handicapped brother.

What did the court decide?

Directed respondent No.2 to look into the petitioner's representation regarding practical difficulties in caring for her handicapped brother and decide the same expeditiously.

Minakshi Devi Vs State of Haryana and Others — Service and Employment | Punjab & Haryana HC (2020)

¶1

CWP-12864-2020 (O&M)

¶2

Through Video Conference

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.

¶4

CWP-12864-2020 (O&M). Decided on: September 24, 2020.

Minakshi Devi

.. Petitioner

VERSUS

State of Haryana and others

¶9

.. Respondents

¶10

¶11

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASGURPREET SINGH PURI

¶12

¶13

PRESENT Mr.Parminder Singh, Advocate, for the petitioner.

¶14

JASGURPREET SINGH PURI, J. (ORAL)

¶15

CM-9752-CWP-2020

¶16

For the reasons recorded in the misc. application, the

¶17

same is allowed.

¶18

Affidavit Annexure P9, is permitted to be taken on

¶19

record.

¶20

Main case

¶21

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the

¶22

¶23

RAJ KUMAR ARORA 2020.09.28 15:43 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶24

CWP-12864-2020 (O&M)

¶25

petitioner has been transferred from Government Senior Secondary School, Subri to the District Education Office, Karnal vide Annexure P6. He has submitted that although the petitioner has already been relieved pursuant to the transfer order but she had given a representation (Annexure P8) to the Director Secondary Education, Panchkula, Haryana, on the ground that the petitioner has a handicapped brother living in her house and the parents of the petitioner have already expired. Now, there is nobody else to look after him. It has been further submitted that she is unable to look after him as she has to travel and it has become practically difficult for her to look after his brother and therefore, owing to practical difficulties her case may be considered sympathetically so that she can look after her handicapped brother.

¶26

Notice of motion.

¶27

Ms.Anju Arora, Addl. A.G. Punjab, accepts notice, on behalf of State of Haryana. She states that she has no objection in case directions are issued to the respondents to decide the representation (Annexure P-8).

¶28

In view of above, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent No.2, to look into the representation (Annexure P8) and decide the same in accordance with law and as expeditiously as possible taking into consideration the practical difficulty faced by the petitioner.

¶29

September 24, 2020. JASGURPREET SINGH PURI) raj arora JUDGE Whether speaking / reasoned Yes / No Whether reportable Yes / No

¶30

¶31

RAJ KUMAR ARORA 2020.09.28 15:43 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Minakshi Devi v. State of Haryana and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Minakshi 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

Bhuru and Another Vs State of Haryana

Salamuddin Vs State of Haryana

Manpreet Singh @ Manna Vs State of Punjab

M/S Guru Nanak Rice and General Mills and Others Vs Union of India and Others

Sardool Singh Vs State of Punjab

Sunehri Devi Vs State of Haryana and Others