Disposed

Rajesh Kumar v. State of Haryana and Others

Punjab & Haryana HC17 Dec 2020CWP/21888/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A petition by an Elementary School Head Master claiming promotion eligibility without 50% marks was disposed of without opinion on merits. The court directed the authority to decide a legal notice with a speaking order within three months.

What did the court decide?

Direction to consider and decide legal notice dated 17.06.2020 by passing a speaking order within three months.

Rajesh Kumar Vs State of Haryana… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Punjab & Haryana HC (2020)

CWP-21888-2020

��

��

�� ! �"#��$%�&��'(��

��)��*�+��

��

��

)��)� ��

��+#��,�-��+�)��)��-�)��--�

¶11

Present: Mr. Vikram Sheoran, Advocate for the petitioner.

¶12

Mr. Ashish Yadav, Addl.A.G., Haryana.

¶13

¶14

LISA GILL, J.

¶15

This matter is being taken up for hearing through video conferencing due to the outbreak of pandemic, COVID-19.

¶16

�� claims to be entitled for promotion to the post of Elementary School Head Master (ESHM) from the date his juniors/similarly situated employees have been promoted vide order dated 24.08.2019 (Annexure P-8).

¶17

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that as per of Haryana School Education (Group C) State Cadre Service Rules, 2012,one of the conditions for promotion to the post of ESHM, is that a candidate should have a degree of B.A./B.Sc./one year Bachelor Degree in Education (B.Ed.) with at least 50% marks.However, as per notification dated 13.11.2019, requirement of minimum percentage of marks (50%) would not be applicable to those incumbents who had taken admission to the Bachelor

¶18

SUNIL 2020.12.18 15:47 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document

¶19

CWP-21888-2020

¶20

¶21

of Education or Bachelor of Elementary Education or equivalent courseprior to 29.07.2011. The present petitioner, it is submitted, had cleared his B.A. and B.Ed. prior to 2011, therefore, he is entitled to promotion in terms of the relevant Rules, even if he has not secured 50% marks in the said course.

¶22

At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner restricts his prayer for a decision on the legal notice dated 17.06.2020 (Annexure P-10), in a time bound manner.

¶23

Notice of motion.

¶24

Mr. Ashish Yadav, Addl. A.G., Haryana, accepts notice on behalf of all the respondents. Advance copy of the writ petition stands served. Learned counsel for the State does not raise any serious objection to the limited prayer addressed.

¶25

Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of this case, but without any expression of opinion on the merits of the matter, this petition is disposed of with a direction to the competent authority to consider and decide legal notice dated 17.06.2020 (Annexure P-10), by passing a speaking order within a period of three months from receipt of certified copy of this order.

¶26

Petition is disposed of accordingly.

¶27

�'��

¶28

��

¶29

SUNIL 2020.12.18 15:47 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document

Rajesh Kumar v. State of Haryana and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajesh Kumar v. State of Haryana and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Navdeep Sharma Vs State of Punjab and Ors.

Ravi Shankar Vs State of Haryana and Others

Savita Nagar Vs State of Haryana and Others

Rajesh Kumar Vs Uttrar Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Limited

Ashok Sood Vs State of Punjab and Ors.

Oriental Insurance Company Limited Vs Permanent Lok Adalat Public Utility Services and Another