Dismissed

Raj Kumar and Another v. State of Haryana and Others

Punjab & Haryana HC5 Dec 2023CWP/3465/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition concerning regularization of services under the settlement policy dated 01.10.2003. The court noted missing factual eligibility and dismissed the petition with liberty to file a representation containing data proving fulfillment of statutory terms.

What did the court decide?

Petition dismissed with liberty to file a detailed representation with supporting data on compliance with regularization policy terms.

Raj Kumar and Another Vs State of… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Punjab & Haryana HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No.2023:PHHC: 155177

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶3

235

¶4

CWP-3465-2019 (O&M) Decided on : 05.12.2023

¶5

RAJ KUMAR AND ANOTHER . . .PETITIONERS

¶6

Versus

¶7

STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS

¶8

. . . RESPONDENTS

¶9

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI

¶10

PRESENT: Mr. Sandeep Singal, Advocate for the petitioner.

¶11

Mr. Harish Rathee, Sr. DAG, Haryana.

¶12

¶13

HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI , J. (Oral)

¶14

In the present petition, the claim of the petitioners is that the petitioners are entitled for regularization of their services under the regularization policy dated 01.10.2003.

¶15

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioners are fully eligible to be considered as per the terms and conditions of the regularization policy dated 01.10.2003, hence, the respondents are under obligation to regularize the services of the petitioners.

¶16

Learned State counsel on the other hand submit that nothing has come on record to show that as to how the petitioners can claim themselves eligible under the regularization policy dated 01.10.2003. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that for being eligible for the said benefit there has to be a regular post as well as the employee concerned should have completed three years of service as on 30.09.2003 and further should have completed 240 days in each calendar year, which facts are missing in the petition and in case a detailed representation alongwith the data in support of

¶17

RIYA 2023.12.06 16:13 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶18

CWP-3465-2019 (O&M)

¶19

2023:PHHC: 155177

¶20

-2-

¶21

the claim is filed by the petitioners claiming any benefit, the same will be considered and decided in accordance with law within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of such representation by passing appropriate speaking order.

¶22

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that keeping in view the statement of learned State counsel, the present petition may kindly be disposed of having been not pressed, at this stage, with liberty to file an appropriate representation with respondents alongwith data giving the details as to how the petitioners fulfilled the requisite terms and conditions of the regularization policy dated 01.10.2023.

¶23

Ordered accordingly.

¶24

(HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI) JUDGE

¶25

05.12.2023 Riya

¶26

Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether Reportable: Yes/No

¶27

RIYA 2023.12.06 16:13 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Raj Kumar and Another v. State of Haryana and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Raj Kumar and Another 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

Nandan Singh & Ors. Vs State of Haryana & Ors.

Surender Singh Vs Haryana Staff Selection Commission through Its Secretary

Sudesh Kumari Vs State of Haryana and Others

Aman Vs State of Haryana and Others

Anil and Ors. Vs State of Haryana and Others

Ram Niwas Vs State of Haryana and Others