Disposed¶22

Neeraj Yadav v. Union of India through Its Secretary and Ors.

Punjab & Haryana HC7 Aug 2025CWP/17520/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

ESIC; Director General, ESIC; OT Technician; promotion dispute; representation dated 23.05.2022 (Annexure P-7); writ petition disposed of on consent without merits; mandamus to decide representation by speaking and reasoned order; time bound direction of three months; Punjab and Haryana High Court; Vinod S. Bhardwaj, J.; CWP-17520-2022 (O&M).

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed of with a direction to respondent No.2-Director General, ESIC, Panchdeep Bhawan, CIG Marg, New Delhi to decide the claim espoused by the petitioner(s), treating it as a representation, and to pass a speaking and reasoned order in accordance with law within three months from receipt of a certified copy of the order. ¶22

Neeraj Yadav Vs Union of India through Its Secretary and Ors. — Punjab & Haryana HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶22

Issue for consideration

Whether respondent No.2 should be directed to consider and decide the petitioner's claim regarding promotion of OT Technician (as espoused in the writ petition and representation dated 23.05.2022, Annexure P-7) by passing a reasoned and speaking order in a time bound manner.

¶20

Court's answer

With the consent of the parties and without commenting upon the merits of the case, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent No.2-Director General, ESIC, Panchdeep Bhawan, CIG Marg, New Delhi to decide the claim espoused by the petitioner(s) in the writ petition.

¶22

Ratio / Principle

The claim of the petitioner(s) is to be treated as a representation, and respondent No.2 shall pass a speaking and reasoned order thereupon in accordance with law within three months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of the order.

¶22

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Punjab and Haryana High Court at Chandigarh; CWP-17520-2022 (O&M); decided 07.08.2025 by Vinod S. Bhardwaj, J. The writ petition prayed for a direction to the respondents to look into and decide the controversy regarding promotion of OT Technician as detailed in representation dated 23.05.2022 (Annexure P-7). Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the petitioner would be satisfied if respondent No.2 were directed to consider and decide the claim by a reasoned and speaking order in a time bound manner; learned counsel for respondents No.2 to 7 raised no objection. With the consent of the parties and without commenting on the merits, the Court disposed of the petition, directing respondent No.2-Director General, ESIC, Panchdeep Bhawan, CIG Marg, New Delhi to decide the claim espoused by the petitioner(s) by treating it as a representation and to pass a speaking and reasoned order thereupon in accordance with law within three months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of the order.

¶1

CWP-17520-2022 (O&M). - 1 -

¶2

IN THE PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARH.

¶3

241

¶4

CWP-17520-2022 (O&M). Date of Decision: 07.08.2025.

NEERAJ YADAV

... Petitioner(s)

Versus

UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS

¶9

... Respondent(s)

¶10

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD S. BHARDWAJ.

¶11

Present: Mr. J.S. Sohal, Advocate, for Mr. Vipin Pal Yadav, Advocate, for the petitioner.

¶12

None for respondent No.1. Mr. Anil Shukla, Advocate, for respondents No.2 to 7.

¶13

VINOD S. BHARDWAJ, J. (ORAL)

¶14

Prayer made in the present writ petition is for directing the

¶15

respondents to look into and decide the controversy regarding the promotion of OT Technician as detailed in representation dated 23.05.2022 (Annexure P-7).

¶16

2 Notice of motion in the present case had been issued vide order

¶17

dated 18.11.2022.

¶18

RAJ KUMAR ARORA 2025.08.11 12:02 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶19

CWP-17520-2022 (O&M). - 2 -

¶20

3 Learned counsel for the petitioner(s) contends that the petitioner(s) would be satisfied, at this juncture, in case respondent No.2 is directed to consider and decide the claim of the petitioners as espoused in the present writ petition by passing a reasoned and speaking order in a time bound manner.

¶21

4 Learned counsel appearing for respondents No.2 to 7 has no objection to the above request.

¶22

5 Accordingly, with the consent of the parties and without commenting upon the merits of the case, the present writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondent No.2-Director General, ESIC, Panchdeep Bhawan, CIG Marg, New Delhi to decide the claim espoused by the petitioner(s) in the present writ petition by treating the same as a representation and to pass a speaking and reasoned order thereupon in accordance with law within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order.

¶23

August 07, 2025. ( VINOD S. BHARDWAJ) raj arora JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No

¶24

RAJ KUMAR ARORA 2025.08.11 12:02 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Neeraj Yadav v. Union of India through Its Secretary and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Neeraj Yadav v. Union of India through Its Secretary and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ved Parkash Goel Vs State of Haryana and Others

A L Gupta Since Deceased through His Legal Heirs Vs State Bank of India and Others

Poonam and Others Vs State of Haryana and Others

Narender Kumar Vs State of Haryana and Another

Arjun Dass Nigam Vs Union of India and Others

Vinod Kumar Vs Union of India & Ors.