Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 2]

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Bishamber Dutt vs Union Of India & Others on 19 March, 2013

Author: Tejinder Singh Dhindsa

Bench: Tejinder Singh Dhindsa

CWP No. 5816 of 2013                                               -1-

      IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
                  AT CHANDIGARH


                                    CWP No. 5816 of 2013
                                    Date of decision: 19.03.2013

Bishamber Dutt
                             ...... Petitioner

           Vs.

Union of India & others
                             ..... Respondents


CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TEJINDER SINGH DHINDSA.


Present:   Mr. H.S. Baath, Advocate for the petitioner.

           .....

Tejinder Singh Dhindsa, J. (Oral)

Counsel for the petitioner would contend that the petitioner is being denied promotion to the post of ASI (GD) on the ground that the petitioner suffers from a medical condition of HIV+. Counsel would argue that on an earlier occasion, the petitioner was being denied promotion to the post of Naik (GD) on the same ground and he had approached this Court in terms of filing CWP No.5153 of 2001. Vide judgment dated 11.11.2009 (Annexure P-1), the writ petition had been allowed and directions had been issued to the respondent-authorities to promote the petitioner to the post of Naik (GD) w.e.f. 12.12.1995 i.e. the date when persons junior to him had been so promoted. Counsel has argued that the respondents are again acting in an arbitrary manner and on the same ground the petitioner is yet again being denied CWP No. 5816 of 2013 -2- consideration for promotion to the post of ASI (GD). Counsel has further asserted that his juniors have been promoted to the higher post on 29.07.2011. Counsel submits that even a detailed representation in this regard already stands submitted at annexure P-6.

In the light of the facts noticed hereinabove, I deem it appropriate to dispose of the present writ petition with a direction to respondent No.4 to consider the grievance of the petitioner and to take a final decision on the representation dated 05.10.2011 (Annexure P-6) strictly in accordance with law and by passing a speaking order within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order.

Disposed of.

March 19, 2013                     (TEJINDER SINGH DHINDSA)
harjeet                                    JUDGE