Dismissed¶21

Randhir Singh v. State of Hry and Ors.

Punjab & Haryana HC22 May 2025CWP/17061/2004

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Denial of promotion due to disciplinary punishment; stoppage of one increment with cumulative effect; promotion from the date junior was promoted; writ of certiorari against order dated 28.10.2003; Rule 7, Haryana Civil Services (Punishment and Appeal) Rules, 1987; chargesheet dated 16.03.1998; termination for absence from duty reinstated after violation of natural justice; connected petition CWP-12533-2001; State of Haryana; High Court of Punjab and Haryana; Tribhuvan Dahiya J.; decided 22.05.2025; petition dismissed.

What did the court decide?

Since the order awarding the punishment of stoppage of one increment with cumulative effect has been upheld in the connected petition (CWP-12533-2001, dismissed 22.05.2025), the petitioner's claim for promotion from the date his junior had been promoted becomes unsustainable. ¶20

Randhir Singh Vs State of Hry and Ors. — Punjab & Haryana HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

CWP-17061-2004

¶2

-1-

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

106/1 CWP-17061-2004 Decided On: 22.05.2025

¶5

RANDHIR SINGH

¶6

....PETITIONER(s)

¶7

Versus

¶8

STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS

¶9

....RESPONDENT(s)

¶10

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TRIBHUVAN DAHIYA

¶11

Present: M r. R. K. Malik, Senior Advocat e with M r. Anshul Labana, Advocate fo r the petitioner.

¶12

M s. Tanushree Gupta, Deputy A d vocate General, Haryana.

¶13

TRIBHUVAN DAHIYA J.(Oral)

¶14

The petition has been filed, inter a lia , seeking a writ of certiorar i quashing the o rder dated 28.10.2003, where b y on account of punishment o f stoppage of o n e increment with cumulative e f fect having been awarded to th e petitioner, he w as not considered for promoti o n as Assistant from the date hi s junior had bee n promoted.

¶15

A s per facts on record, in brief, the petitioner was appointed a s Clerk in the r e spondent Department on 25.01. 1 977. On account of his absenc e from duty fro m 24.03.1986, his services wer e terminated on 26.12.1986. Th e termination o r der was challenged by him b y filing CWP-9670-1997, whic h was disposed of on 19.09.1997, by setting aside the order on account o f violation of t h e Principles of Natural Justi c e, and granting liberty to tak e action in acco r dance with law. Pursuant ther e to, the petitioner joined back i n service on 19.11.1997. Later, he was issued a chargesheet dated 16.03.1998 , under Rule 7 o f the Haryana Civil Services (Punishment and Appeal) Rules , 1987, on the g round that he remained absen t from duty from 24.03.1986 t o 07.02.1990, a nd for leaving the countr y without permission of th e Government. A regular departmental enqui r y was conducted and he wa s Aman Dua 2025.05.31 13:27 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this judicial document

¶16

CWP-17061-2004

¶17

-2-

¶18

awarded puni s hment of stoppage of one incre m ent with cumulative effect vid e order dated 1 2 .07.1999, and the period of hi s absence from duty was treate d as leave with o ut pay. The statutory appeal a g ainst the punishment order wa s dismissed by t h e competent authority on 27.0 8 .1999.

¶19

The order of punishment was c hallenged by the petitioner b y filing the con n ected petition, CWP-12533-20 0 1, which has been dismissed o n 22.05.2025, u pholding the orders awardin g the punishment as well a s dismissing the appeal against it.

¶20

I n the instant case, the petitioner’s claim for promotion from th e date his junior had been promoted, was de c lined vide the impugned orde r dated 28.10. 2 003 only on the ground th a t he had been awarded th e punishment o f stoppage of one increment w i th cumulative effect. Since th e order awardin g the punishment has been uph e ld in the connected petition, th e claim becom e s unsustainable. The punis h ment disentitled him to b e considered fo r promotion along with his junio r .

¶21

I n view thereof, there is no me r it in the petition and it stand s

¶22

dismissed.

¶23

( TRIBHUVAN DAHIYA) 22.05.2025 JUDGE Ad

¶24

Whether speaking/reasoned? Yes/No Whether reportable? Yes/No

¶25

Aman Dua 2025.05.31 13:27 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this judicial document

Randhir Singh v. State of Hry and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Randhir Singh v. State of Hry and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Surender Singh and Ors. Vs State of Haryana and Others

Rajesh Kumar and Anr. Vs State of Haryana and Ors.

Rati Ram Vs State of Haryana and Others

Randhir Singh Vs State of Hy.Tc.

Rajesh Kumar Alias Raju Jethi Vs State of Punjab and Others

Neetu Rani Vs State of Haryana and Others