Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details


High Court of Punjab and Haryana, Chandigarh

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation


Shamsher Singh v. State of Haryana & Ors - CWP-13595-2005 [2006] RD-P&H 2072 (28 March 2006)


Case No. : C.W.P.No.13595 of 2005

Date of Decision : April 04, 2006.

Shamsher Singh .... Petitioner


State of Haryana & others .... Respondents Coram : Hon'ble Mr.Justice J.S.Khehar

Hon'ble Mr.Justice P.S.Patwalia

* * *

Present : Mr.Rakesh Nehra, Advocate

for the petitioner.

Mr.Harish Rathee, Senior DAG, Haryana

for respondents no.1 to 3.

Mr.Rajat Rathee, Advocate

for respondent no.4.

* * *

J.S.Khehar, J. (Oral) :

The petitioner was originally transferred from Government Senior Secondary School, Misri in District Bhiwani to Government Senior Secondary School, Pakasma in District Rohtak, by an order dated August 10, 2005. Despite the aforesaid transfer, the petitioner was not allowed to assume his duties despite the fact that he submitted his joining report on August 12, 2005. The petitioner impugned the transfer order dated August 10, 2005 by filling the instant writ petition.

A joint written statement on behalf of respondents no.1 to 4 has been filed in court today. The same is taken on record. A copy thereof has C.W.P.No.13595 of 2005 : 2 :

been furnished to the learned counsel for the petitioner. The aforesaid written statement includes an order dated March 28, 2006 (Annexure R-6), whereby the petitioner has been transferred from Government Girls Senior Secondary School, Pakasma to Government High School, Anwal in District Rohtak. Learned counsel for the petitioner has no objection to the aforesaid transfer vide order dated March 28, 2006.

The only objection raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner is for salary during the period he remained out of service forcibly, on account of respondents not allowing the petitioner to assume his charge in furtherance of the transfer order dated August 10, 2005. In so far as the instant issue is concerned, learned counsel for the respondents states that the petitioner shall be paid for the period under reference along with the salary of the month of April, 2006.

In view of the above, the instant writ petition has been rendered infructuous.

Disposed of as having been rendered infructuous.

( J.S.Khehar )


April 04, 2006 ( P.S.Patwalia )

monika Judge


Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites


dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.