Punjab-Haryana High Court
Ved Parkash Yadav & Ors vs State Of Haryana & Ors on 25 April, 2022
Author: Arun Monga
Bench: Arun Monga
335
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
CWP-1092-1997 (O&M)
Date of decision: April 25, 2022
Ved Parkash Yadav and others
.....Petitioners
versus
State of Haryana and others
....Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN MONGA
Present: Mr. Sandeep Dhull, Advocate for the petitioner(s).
Mr. Deepak Bhardwaj, DAG, Haryana.
*****
ARUN MONGA, J. (ORAL)
Petitioners are seeking issuance of a writ in the nature of Certiorari to quash order dated 23.07.199 vide which service rendered by them prior to 20.01.1994 was not considered for calculating 15 years/5 years regular satisfactory service for grant of selection grade and two additional increments on passing of AMIE qualification respectively.
Petition was filed in the year 1997 and has been lying admitted ever since. When called for hearing after around 25 years, both learned counsels are unable to assist the Court for lack of instructions. Learned counsel for the petitioners states that despite attempts, his office could not contact the petitioners, whereas on the other hand, learned counsel for the State submits that he made attempts to get instructions from the office representatives of the respondents, but for lack of any assistance, he is unable to address arguments.
It seems that by sheer effluxion of time and pendency of the writ petition for about 25 years before this Court, either it has been rendered infructuous or even otherwise the petitioners seem to have lost interest in pursuing the same.
1 of 2 ::: Downloaded on - 24-07-2022 19:37:08 ::: In any case, it appears that even on merits, claim of the petitioners is not admissible in view of the following stand taken in Para 1 of the reply, which is reproduced herein for ready reference:
"1. That the petitioners were appointed as Sectional Officers/Building Inspectors in the Department of Town & Country Planning Haryana with certain qualifications. The main duties and responsibilities of these Sectional Officers/Building Inspectors is to check unauthorized constructions and made surveys and have no work which can be equated with the duties and responsibilities of Junior Engineer in PWD (B&R) or other Department in Govt. of Haryana, hence, they cannot claim parity with the Junior Engineer of other Departments. The Department of Town & Country Planning Haryana re-designated the post of Sectional Officer/Building Inspector as Junior Engineer w.e.f. 27.01.1994 and earlier to 27.01.94 there was no post of Junior Engineer in the Department of Town & Country Planning, Haryana so the petitioners could not be given the benefit of the past service as Junior Engineer. The petitioners have been given all the benefits as per Technical (Group C) Service Rule 1996 of the Department of Town and Country Planning w.e.f. 27.01.94 (including the pay scale of Junior Engineers). Therefore, the writ is wholly misconceived and is liable to be dismissed on this ground alone."
The above said stand of the respondents remains uncontroverted as neither replication nor any affidavit has been filed by the petitioners.
No grounds are made out to interfere. Dismissed.
(ARUN MONGA)
JUDGE
April 25, 2022
vandana
Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No
Whether reportable: Yes/No
2 of 2
::: Downloaded on - 24-07-2022 19:37:08 :::