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 0]

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Ashok Kumar Sharma vs Punjab State Electricity Board on 29 October, 2013

Author: Mahesh Grover

Bench: Mahesh Grover

            CWP No. 8309 of 2001                                                        1


            IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

                                                 *****
                                                 CWP No. 8309 of 2001
                                                 Date of decision : October 29, 2013

                                                 *****

            Ashok Kumar Sharma
                                                                   ............Petitioner

            Versus


            Punjab State Electricity Board, The Mall, Patiala
            through its Secretary                          ...........Respondent

                                *****
            CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MAHESH GROVER
                                *****

            Present:            Mr. Ranjivan Singh, Advocate for the petitioner.

                                Mr. G.S Ghuman, Advocate for the respondent.


                                                 *****

            MAHESH GROVER, J (ORAL)

The petitioner contends that he has been working as an Assistant Lineman (ALM) since June 1979 even though his appointment was against the post of a T-Mate. He thus prayed that emoluments admissible to an Assistant Lineman (ALM) be released to him. He has placed reliance on Annexure P-1 which is the certificate issued by the Executive Engineer and indicates that the petitioner has been serving as an Assistant Lineman ( ALM).

The respondents have categorically denied the plea of the petitioner and have also denied this document. No counter affidavit has been filed by the petitioner.

Kukreja Ritu

2013.10.31 16:12 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh CWP No. 8309 of 2001 2

Having regard to the aforesaid, when there is a serious dispute about the facts having been pleaded by the petitioner, I am of the opinion that this controversy cannot be answered in the exercise of the jurisdiction of this Court.

The petition is, therefore, disposed of with a liberty to the petitioner to avail of any other alternative remedy, that may be, available to him so as to establish the facts which are seriously in dispute here before this Court.

            October 29, 2013                           ( MAHESH GROVER )
             ritu                                            JUDGE




Kukreja Ritu
2013.10.31 16:12
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
Chandigarh