Punjab-Haryana High Court
R.K. Aggarwal vs The State Of Haryana And Another on 22 November, 2012
Author: Augustine George Masih
Bench: Augustine George Masih
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
CWP No. 23027 of 2012
Date of Decision : 22.11.2012
R.K. Aggarwal ..... Petitioner(s)
Versus
The State of Haryana and another ..... Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH
Present:- Mr. Arvind Bansal, Advocate, for the petitioner(s).
AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH, J. (ORAL)
It is the contention of the petitioner that the petitioner is entitled to fixing of his year of promotion according to the availability of the vacancies for the post of Sub-Divisional Engineer, in the light of the Division Bench judgment of this Court in CWP No. 10931 of 1990 titled as Gian Singh Versus The State of Haryana and another, decided on 18.1.2011 (Annexure-P-1).
Counsel contends that the petitioner has filed a representation dated 22.10.2011 (Annexure P-4) and reminder dated 7.2.2012 (Annexure-P-
5) to the Financial Commissioner and Principal Secretary to Government of Haryana, Public Works Department (PWD) (B and R)-respondent No. 1 but till date no decision thereon has been taken or conveyed to the petitioner.
Counsel for the petitioner states that the petitioner, at this stage, would be satisfied if a direction is issued to the Financial Commissioner and Principal Secretary to Government of Haryana, Public Works Department (PWD) (B and R)-respondent No. 1 to consider the claim of the petitioner and decide the same within some specified time.
CWP No. 23027 of 2012 -2-
Without going into the merits of the case or commenting thereon, this petition is disposed of with direction to the Financial Commissioner and Principal Secretary to Government of Haryana, Public Works Department (PWD) (B and R)-respondent No. 1 to consider and decide the representation dated 22.10.2011 (Annexure P-4) and reminder dated 7.2.2012 (Annexure-P-
5), preferred by the petitioner, within a period of three months from the date of the receipt of the certified copy of this order. The decision so taken be conveyed to the petitioner forthwith.
In case, the petitioner is held entitled to the benefit as claimed by him in his representation, consequential benefits be granted to the petitioner within a further period of two months. In case, the claim as projected by the petitioner through his aforesaid representation is not to be accepted, then a well reasoned and speaking order be passed by respondent No. 1 and the same be conveyed to the petitioner forthwith.
(AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH) JUDGE 22.11.2012 sjks