Punjab-Haryana High Court
Tejinder Kaur vs Chandigarh Administration And Others on 22 March, 2017
CWP No. 636 of 2017 (O&M) ::1::
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
CWP No. 636 of 2017 (O&M)
Date of decision : March 22, 2017
Tejinder Kaur,
...... Petitioner
v.
Chandigarh Administration and others,
...... Respondents
***
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY TEWARI
***
Present : Mr. Anupam Bhanot, Advocate
for the petitioner.
Ms. Madhu Dayal, Advocate
for the respondents.
***
Ajay Tewari, J (Oral)
Reply filed. Copy supplied.
By way of this writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the order of refixation of pay and recovery without issuance of any show cause notice.
In the reply, it has been mentioned that the respondents have kept the impugned order in abeyance and have issued a show cause notice to the petitioner, and consequently, the present writ petition has been rendered infructuous.
Counsel for the petitioner states that in these circumstances instead of keeping the impugned order in abeyance, it would be necessary to withdraw the same so that a fresh order can be passed in accordance with law.
1 of 2
::: Downloaded on - 26-03-2017 04:54:04 :::
CWP No. 636 of 2017 (O&M) ::2::
Learned Sr. DAG Haryana is not in a position to deny the logic of the above argument.
In the circumstances, it is clear that by issuing a show cause notice to the petitioner, the respondents have accepted that there was an infirmity in the previous order. Consequently, this petition is deemed to have been allowed and the impugned order is deemed to have been set aside. The respondents would move in accordance with law.
Since the main case has been decided, the pending C.Ms, if any, also stand disposed of.
( AJAY TEWARI )
March 22, 2017 JUDGE
`kk'
Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No
Whether Reportable: Yes/No
2 of 2
::: Downloaded on - 26-03-2017 04:54:05 :::