Surinder Singh Katoch vs Punjab State Civil Supplies ... on 18 October, 2011

[Cites 0, Cited by 3]

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Surinder Singh Katoch vs Punjab State Civil Supplies ... on 18 October, 2011

Bench: Daya Chaudhary

      IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
                   AT CHANDIGARH
                   ****
                            C.W.P. No.3469 of 2011
                            Date of Decision:18.10.2011

Surinder Singh Katoch
                                                            .....Petitioner
             Vs.

Punjab State Civil Supplies Corporation Limited and another

                                                            .....Respondents

CORAM:- HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE DAYA CHAUDHARY

Present:-    Mr. P.C. Arora, Advocate for the petitioner.

             Ms. Deepali Puri, Advocate for respondent No.1.

             Mr. P.K. Garg, Advocate for respondent No.2.
                          ****


DAYA CHAUDHARY, J.(Oral)

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is being harassed for not regularising the period of suspension and also by not granting benefit of proficiency step up on completion of 8 years, 16 years and 24 years of service. Learned counsel submits that the petitioner has also served a legal notice upon the respondents which is annexed as Annexure P.12 with the petition but the same has not been decided.

Ms. Deepali Puri, learned counsel for respondent No.1 submits that the period of suspension has already been regularised vide order dated 10.3.2011 and appeal filed by the petitioner is still pending. The order of recovery has been made against the petitioner and serious allegations of embezzlement were there against the petitioner. Learned counsel for respondent No.1 also submits that in case the petitioner is satisfied, the legal notice served upon the respondents would be decided within a period of one month from today.

C.W.P. No.3469 of 2011 -2-

Learned counsel for the petitioner also submits in case the period of suspension has been regularised then the petitioner is entitled for salary. He also submits that in case the respondents are directed to decide legal notice within some stipulated period, he would be satisfied.

In view of the statement made by learned counsel for the parties and without commenting on the merits of the case, the present petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent No.1 to decide the legal notice Annexure P.12, annexed with the petition within a period of one month from the date of receipt of the copy of the order by passing a speaking order in accordance with law and in case the petitioner is found entitled for the relief as claimed in the legal notice, the relief be granted to the petitioner within a period of three months thereafter.

Disposed of accordingly.

October 18, 2011                              ( DAYA CHAUDHARY )
renu                                                  JUDGE

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Punjab-Haryana High Court