Dismissed

Sanjeev Kumar v. State of Haryana and Others

Punjab & Haryana HC8 Oct 2021CWP/20618/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought regularisation of services from an earlier date. Court disposed of the petition without criminal adjudication, directing the competent authority to examine and decide the pending representation treating petition's contentions as supplementary.

What did the court decide?

Direction to competent authority to decide pending representation and petition's contentions within three months.

Sanjeev Kumar Vs State of Haryana… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Punjab & Haryana HC (2021)

¶1

118

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶3

CWP-20618-2021 Date of decision: 08.10.2021 Sanjeev Kumar …Petitioner

¶4

Versus

¶5

State of Haryana and others ...Respondents

¶6

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN MONGA

¶7

Present: Mr. Vikas Lochab, Advocate, for the petitioner.

¶8

Mr. Saurabh Mohunta, DAG, Haryana. (Presence marked through video conference)

¶9

¶10

ARUN MONGA, J. (ORAL)

¶11

Petitioner herein, inter alia , seeks issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus directing respondents No.1 to 3 to regularise his services w.e.f. 01.08.1998 i.e. the date when his junior had been regularised, instead of 07.06.2004.

¶12

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that qua his aforesaid grievance, petitioner submitted many representations but to no avail. Hence, the instant petition.

¶13

Notice of motion.

¶14

On advance service, learned State counsel joins proceedings and accepts notice on behalf of the respondent-State of Haryana and seeks time to file return.

¶15

At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that let a final decision be taken either way, by the competent authority on the pending representation dated 05.04.2021.

¶16

SHALINI BHATIA 2021.10.08 15:58 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶17

Given the nature of order being passed, there is no necessity to seek return by any of the respondents as no further proceedings and/or pleadings are required.

¶18

Without commenting on the merits of the case, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the competent authority to look into the grievance of the petitioner as per representation dated 05.04.2021 and also by keeping in view the contentions raised in the present petition by treating the same as supplementary representation and take a decision, in accordance with law.

¶19

Let the needful be done within a period of three months from today.

¶20

9. Disposed of accordingly.

¶21

08.10.2021 (ARUN MONGA) vandana JUDGE

¶22

Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether reportable: Yes/No

¶23

SHALINI BHATIA 2021.10.08 15:58 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Sanjeev Kumar v. State of Haryana and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sanjeev 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

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Gurcharan Singh Vs Gurnam Singh and Ors.

Manager Shri Ram City Union Finance Ltd. Vs Radhika and Ors.

Avtar Singh @ Dablu Vs State of Punjab

Raj Kumar and Another Vs Jsj Builders Private Limited

Rimpi Gupta Vs State of Haryana and Ors.

Anita Alias Chhoti and Anothers Vs Tara Chand and Others