Punjab-Haryana High Court
Jaswant Singh vs Managing Director, Uhbvnl And Ors on 2 May, 2019
Author: Harsimran Singh Sethi
Bench: Harsimran Singh Sethi
CWP No. 22103 of 2016 (O&M)
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
CWP No. 22103 of 2016 (O&M)
Date of Decision : 02.05.2019
Jaswant Singh
...Petitioner
Versus
Managing Director, UHBVNL and others
...Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI
Present: Mr. Pankaj Maini, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. Hitesh Pandit, Advocate for the respondents.
***
Harsimran Singh Sethi, J.(Oral)
CM-2382-CWP-2018 Notice of the application to the counsel opposite. Learned counsel for the respondents does not have any objection in case the names of respondents No. 1 to 3 are deleted from the array of the parties.
In view of the above, application is allowed. Names of respondents No. 1 to 3 are ordered to be deleted keeping in view the request made by learned counsel for the petitioner in the present application. CWP-22103-2016 and CM-2383-CWP-2018 Learned counsel for the petitioner states that respondent No. 4, who is the Officer concerned to grant the benefit to the petitioner, was impleaded as a respondent vide CM No. 15328-CWP-2016.
1 of 3 ::: Downloaded on - 12-05-2019 23:39:57 ::: CWP No. 22103 of 2016 (O&M) 2 Mr. Hitesh Pandit, Advocate accepts notice on behalf of respondent No. 4.
Learned counsel for the petitioner states that the present writ petition is pending since 2016 and the prayer of the petitioner in the present writ petition is for entering the name of the wife in the records as being maintained by the respondents as his first wife died on 17.05.1999 and after the death of his first wife, the petitioner had re-married on 29.04.2006 and the details of the present wife of the petitioner are not being entered by the respondents in the record, which may create problem at later stage.
Learned counsel for the petitioner states that the petitioner has made representations in this regard on 24.12.2006 and again on 10.03.2010 to the respondents. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that the petitioner will be satisfied, at this stage, in case the request made by the petitioner in the above mentioned representations is decided in a time bound manner by the respondents.
Learned counsel for respondent No. 4 states that the respondents have no objection with regard to the grant of prayer of deciding the representations made by the petitioner dated 24.12.2006 and 10.03.2010, collectively attached as Annexure P-6 with the petition in a time bound manner.
Without going into the merits of the case or expressing any opinion to the entitlement of the petitioner in respect of the claim prayed in the present writ petition or in the representations, the present writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents to pass an appropriate speaking order on the claim raised by the petitioner in the representations 2 of 3 ::: Downloaded on - 12-05-2019 23:39:57 ::: CWP No. 22103 of 2016 (O&M) 3 dated 24.12.2006 and 10.03.2010 (Annexure P-6 Colly) within a period of three months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.
The writ petition as well as CM No. 2383-CWP-2018 stands disposed of.
May 02, 2019 (HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI)
kanchan JUDGE
Whether speaking/reasoned? Yes/No
Whether reportable? Yes/No
3 of 3
::: Downloaded on - 12-05-2019 23:39:57 :::