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 2, Cited by 0]

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Shamsher Singh And Others vs State Of Haryana And Others on 23 May, 2012

Author: Augustine George Masih

Bench: Augustine George Masih

CWP No. 9912 of 2012                                     1

     IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
                       CHANDIGARH.


                              CWP No. 9912 of 2012
                              Date of Decision : May 23, 2012


Shamsher Singh and others
                                              ....   PETITIONERS
                 Vs.
State of Haryana and others
                                              ..... RESPONDENTS



CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH



Present :   Mr. Sanjiv Gupta, Advocate,
            for the petitioners.

AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH, J. (ORAL)

Petitioners were appointed on contract basis in the year 1993. A notification dated 28.07.1994 was issued by the Transport Commissioner, Haryana, wherein it was laid down that on completion of two years of service of the Conductors/Drivers, who have been appointed on contract basis, their services shall stand regularized against the vacant posts. Petitioners, after their appointment, were transferred to other depots. The services of the persons, who have been appointed after the petitioners, stand regularized from the year 1995-96 as per the instructions dated 28.07.1994. Petitioners were, however, regularized in the year 1998. Through the present petition, they are claiming the prior date of regularization in accordance with the judgments passed by this Court in CWP No. 14111 of 2001 titled CWP No. 9912 of 2012 2 as Pardeep Kumar and others vs. State of Haryana and others, decided on 18.05.2009 (Annexure P-9) and CWP No. 18401 of 2009 titled as Mukesh Kumar vs. State of Haryana and others, decided on 10.01.2012 (Annexure P-10).

Claiming the said benefit, petitioners have submitted a representation dated 19.01.2012 (Anneuxre P-11) to the General Manager, Haryana Roadways, Delhi-respondent No. 3 but till date nothing has been heard in response to their representation. Counsel for the petitioners contends that the petitioners, at this stage, would be satisfied if a direction is issued to the General Manager, Haryana Roadways, Delhi-respondent No. 3 to consider and decide the representation dated 19.01.2012 (Anneuxre P-11) within some specified time.

Without going into the merits of the case or commenting thereon, the present petition is disposed of with directions to the General Manager, Haryana Roadways, Delhi-respondent No. 3 to consider and decide the representation dated 19.01.2012 (Anneuxre P-11) within a period of three months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. The decision so taken be conveyed to the petitioners forthwith. In case, the petitioners are held entitled to the claim made by them through their representation, the consequential benefits, if any, be released to them, in accordance with law, within a further period of two months.



                                   (AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH )
May 23, 2012                                JUDGE
pj
 CWP No. 9912 of 2012   3