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 1]

Punjab-Haryana High Court

C-1 Ram Karan vs The State Of Haryana And Others on 15 April, 2009

Author: Ajay Tewari

Bench: Ajay Tewari

C.W.P No. 18359 of 2008                                    ::1::

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH



                                      C.W.P No. 18359 of 2008
                                      Date of decision : April 15, 2009


C-1 Ram Karan

                                            ...... Petitioner (s)

                         v.

The State of Haryana and others,
                                            ...... Respondent(s)

                                ***

CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE AJAY TEWARI

                                ***

Present :    Mr. Ranjit Saini, Advocate
             for the petitioner.

             Mr.Harish Rathee, Sr. DAG Haryana
             for the respondents.

                                ***

1.   Whether Reporters of Local Newspapers may be allowed to see the
     judgment ?
2.   To be referred to the Reporters or not ?
3.   Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest ?
                                ***

AJAY TEWARI, J (Oral)

Counsel for the respondents is not in a position to deny that the case of the petitioner is not identical to that of Satpal, Constable. Both of them were charge-sheeted for the same offence of having obtained bribe from one Hira Lal and were ultimately punished with the punishment of `censure'. The petitioner was approved for being promoted as Head Constable, while Satpal was actually so promoted. However, lateron Satpal was reverted on account of the fact that his integrity had been held to be doubtful for the year 2002. He challenged the same by way of CWP C.W.P No. 18359 of 2008 ::2::

No.9871 of 2007. The said writ petition was allowed by judgment dated 31.1.2008 and consequently the order of reversion of Satpal was cancelled.

In the circumstances, this writ petition is allowed. The respondents are directed to consider the case of the petitioner for promotion (from the due date) as per the order, Annexure P-6, within a period of two months from the receipt of a certified copy of this order.

No costs.

                                          ( AJAY TEWARI              )
April    15, 2009.                             JUDGE
`kk'