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 1, Cited by 1]

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Raju Alias Raj Pal And Others vs State Of Haryana And Others on 21 January, 2013

Author: Tejinder Singh Dhindsa

Bench: Tejinder Singh Dhindsa

            IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
                        AT CHANDIGARH

                              CWP No.1113 of 2013
                              Date of decision:21.01.2013

Raju alias Raj Pal and others                    ....Petitioners
                              Versus

State of Haryana and others                      ....Respondents

CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TEJINDER SINGH DHINDSA


Present:    Mr. Kuldeep Tiwari, Advocate, for the petitioners.
                  ***

TEJINDER SINGH DHINDSA, J (ORAL)

The petitioners are stated to be working in Group 'D' Post with the various departments of State of Haryana. They are seeking regularization of their services alongwith all consequential benefits in the light of various policy decisions issued by the Government of Haryana on the subject.

Counsel for the petitioners would refer to the documents at Annexure P6, whereby the names of the petitioners had been recommended for the Forest Divisional Officer, Bhiwani to the Conservator of Forest (West Circle), Hisar, recommending their case for grant of benefit of regularization of services.

Counsel for the petitioners submits that the claim is still pending consideration and no final decision has yet been taken. Counsel further submits that in identical situation, this Court has already issued directions on 05.10.2012 in CWP No.19889 of 2012 titled as 'Anand Kumar and another vs. State of Haryana and others (Annexure P8).

CWP No.1113 of 2013 -2-

Without making any observations as regards the merits of the claim raised by the present petitioners, I deem it appropriate to dispose of the present writ petition, in terms of granting liberty to the petitioners to submit a detailed representation as regards their claim and grievance. In the eventuality of any representation being preferred, the respondents shall be obligated to take a final decision thereupon strictly in accordance with law and by passing a speaking order within a period of 04 months from the date of submission of the same.

The writ petition is disposed of.

January 21, 2013                   (TEJINDER SINGH DHINDSA)
savita                                      JUDGE