Punjab-Haryana High Court
Baljit Singh vs State Of Punjab And Ors on 6 December, 2017
Author: Daya Chaudhary
Bench: Daya Chaudhary
CWP No.16878 of 2017 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH.
CWP No.16878 of 2017
Date of Decision: 06.12.2017
Baljit Singh ....Petitioner
Versus
State of Punjab and others ....Respondents
BEFORE :- HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE DAYA CHAUDHARY
Present:- Mr. Krishan Singh Dadwal, Advocate
for the petitioner.
*****
DAYA CHAUDHARY, J. (ORAL)
The petitioner has restricted his prayer only to the extent that impugned order dated 22.02.2017 is totally non-speaking and has been passed without any application of mind and no reason, whatsoever, has been mentioned as to why his representation has not been accepted, whereas, the similarly situated persons have been appointed. Names of those persons were specifically mentioned but still the same has not been considered.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon judgments of Hon'ble the Apex Court in cases M/s Kranti Associates Pvt. Ltd. & another vs Sh. Masood Ahmed Khan and others 2010(9) SCC 496, Md. Zamil Ahmed vs State of Bihar and others 2016(3) SCT 111, judgments of this Court in cases Mohd. Najibul Hassan vs The Board of Governors, Government of Polytechnic Education and others 2015(2) SCT 204, The Associated Cement Companies Limited and another vs State of Haryana 1 of 2 ::: Downloaded on - 10-12-2017 08:32:24 ::: CWP No.16878 of 2017 2 and others 2013(4) SCT 677, Krishna Kumari vs State of Haryana and others 2012(2) SCT 736, Sarabdeep Kaur vs State of Punjab and another 2016(1) SCT 83, Smt. Suksham Bala vs State of Punjab and others 2009 (2) SCT 315 and Dr. Ashok Kumar Monga vs State of Punjab and another 2017(1) SCT 140 in support of his arguments.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner would be satisfied, in case, the directions are issued by this Court to pass a speaking order on the representation.
Keeping in view the limited prayer of the petitioner, the present petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent No.1 to reconsider the claim of the petitioner and pass a fresh detailed speaking order by considering the submissions made in the representation in view of ratio of judgments as mentioned above within a period of two months from the date of receipt of certified copy of the order.
The petition is disposed of accordingly.
(DAYA CHAUDHARY)
06.12.2017 JUDGE
gurpreet
Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No
Whether Reportable Yes/No
2 of 2
::: Downloaded on - 10-12-2017 08:32:25 :::