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

Shavinder Singh vs Pspcl & Ors on 3 April, 2012

Author: Surya Kant

Bench: Surya Kant

           HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
                       CHANDIGARH
                                     ****
                          CWP No.6355 of 2012 (O&M)
                          Date of Decision: 03.04.2012
                                     ****
Shavinder Singh                                     . . . . Petitioner

                                       vs.

PSPCL & Ors.                                                    . . . . Respondents
                                           ****
CORAM :             HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT
                                           ****
1. Whether Reporters of local papers 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?
                                 ****
Present:     Mr. Dinesh Kumar, Advocate for the petitioner
                                 ****
SURYA KANT J. (ORAL)

(1). The petitioner is a Volley-Ball Player and is working on contract basis in the respondent-Corporation (POWERCOM). The contract of the petitioner as Volley-Ball Player has been renewed from time to time. It appears that the respondent-Corporation decided to regularize services of Volley-Ball Players and the petitioner was also recommended to be kept as stand-by Player by the Committee which screened the cases of all Players. The petitioner's claim was kept at No.2 in the list, a copy whereof has been placed on record as Annexure P2. (2). The grievance of the petitioner is that regularization has been done on pick and choose basis inasmuch as the person placed at Sr.No.5 (Hardeep Singh) who was over-age also has been made regular, ignoring the preferential claim of CWP No.6355 of 2012.doc -2- petitioner. The petitioner accordingly seeks a direction to set aside the order of regularization of some of the Volley- Ball Players with a further direction for his own regular absorption. It is pointed out that some vacancies are still available against which the petitioner's claim can be considered.

(3). If that is so, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to respondents No.1 to 3 to consider the claim of the petitioner for his absorption as Volley-Ball Player on regular basis by following the same criteria as has been applied in the case of private respondents and, pass an appropriate order within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order.

(4).             Ordered accordingly. Dasti.

03.04.2012                                     (SURYA KANT)
vishal shonkar
                                                   Judge




                                                                             2