Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

BIJENDER KUMAR versus STATE OF HARYANA & ORS

High Court of Punjab and Haryana, Chandigarh

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Bijender Kumar v. State of Haryana & Ors - CWP-308-2005 [2006] RD-P&H 3584 (3 July 2006)

CWP No.308 of 2005 1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

CWP No.308 of 2005

DATE OF DECISION:6.7.2006

Bijender Kumar

....... PETITIONER

VERSUS

State of Haryana and others

..........RESPONDENTS

CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M.KUMAR
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M.S. BEDI

PRESENT: Mr.RK Malik, Advocate for petitioner.

Mr.Harish Rathee,Sr.DAG, Haryana for the State.

Mr.DS Rawat,Advocate for respondent No.4 Mr.Sanjeev K Tamak, Advocate for respnodents 2 and 3 Mr.Arun Yadav, Advocate for respondent No.24 M.M.KUMAR,J.

Written statements filed in Court on behalf of respondents 2,3 and 4 are taken on record.

The prayer made in this writ petition is for considering the claim of the petitioner for promotion as Executive Engineer from the date his juniors have been promoted along with all other consequential benefits.

It is appropriate to mention that the services of the petitioner were terminated. He filed CWP No.2473 of 1993, which was allowed and the termination order was set aside and a direction was issued to the official respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for regularisation in accordance with the policy. He was also held entitled to all the CWP No.308 of 2005 2

consequential benefits including continuation of service and salary for the period mentioned in the order passed on 13.11.2002.

In reply, the official respondents have taken a preliminary objection No.4 to point out that against the judgment of the learned Single Judge dated 13.11.2002 L.P.A.No.66 of 2004 was pending and the case of the petitioner for promotion to the post of Executive Engineer could not be considered. In the preliminary objection it has further been asserted that in case the L.P.A. is decided in favour of the petitioner then he would be considered for promotion and all consequential benefits. With the replication a copy of the order dated 9.3.2006 dismissing the L.P.A. No.66 of 2004 has been appended as Annexure P-10.

In view of the above, we dispose of this writ petition with a direction to the official respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for promotion to the post of Executive Engineer. It is made clear that in the event of any seniority dispute between the petitioner and the private respondents shall also be subject matter of the consideration of the official respondents. The needful shall be done within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. If the petitioner is found eligible for promotion then all the consequential benefits shall accrue and granted to him.

( M.M.KUMAR )

JUDGE

May 5,2006 ( M.M.S. BEDI )

TSM JUDGE

CWP No.308 of 2005 3


Copyright

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

Advertisement

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 |

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