Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

RACHNA versus STATE OF HARYANA & ORS

High Court of Punjab and Haryana, Chandigarh

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Rachna v. State of Haryana & Ors - CWP-11154-2006 [2006] RD-P&H 4503 (20 July 2006)

C.W.P. No. 11154 of 2006 [1]

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.

C.W.P. No. 11154 of 2006

Date of Decision: July 25, 2006

Rachna

.....Petitioner

Vs.

State of Haryana and others

.....Respondents

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

Present:- Mr. Munish Jolly, Advocate,

for the petitioner.

-.-

M.M. KUMAR, J. (ORAL)

For the relief claimed by the petitioner, no representation has been made raising the argument that the order dated July 13, 2006 (P-3) cannot be applied to those inter-District transfers which have already been operated and persons like petitioners have joined. The petitioner is relegated to the remedy of filing a representation to the Director, Elementary Education, Haryana, Chandigarh to consider her case C.W.P. No. 11154 of 2006 [2]

sympathetically and to clarify as to whether the order dated July 13, 2006 (P-3) would operate retrospectively or it would only have affect on the transfers to be made after the issuance of that order. A representation by the petitioner shall be made within two weeks from today under registered A.D.

If the needful is done within two weeks, the petitioner shall not be relieved from her present place of posting for two weeks and if the representation is made then till the date of decision on the representation. The Director, Elementary Education, Haryana, shall decide the representation, if any, made by the petitioner within two weeks thereafter. However, if the decision goes against the petitioner then the same shall not be given effect to for further one week.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has prayed that similarly situated persons who had earlier filed various writ petitions are not being permitted to join in pursuance to the transfer orders passed before issuance of order dated 13.7.2006. We make it clear that the respondent shall not cause any obstruction in the joining of the petitioner and if any obstruction is caused, the petitioner as well as others who have filed similar petitions, would be entitled to move an appropriate application. We also make it clear that any violation of our directions, shall be seriously viewed and this may convey to the Secretary, Department of Education, Haryana Civil Secretariat, Chandigarh, the Director Primary Education, 30 Bays Building, Sector 17, Chandigarh, who shall ensure that all the District and Primary Education Officers obey the orders passed by this Court.

C.W.P. No. 11154 of 2006 [3]

Disposed of in the above terms.

A copy of this order be given dasti by the Bench Secretary today itself to the learned counsel for the parties.

(M.M.KUMAR)

JUDGE

July 25, 2006 (M.M.S.BEDI)

sanjay JUDGE


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.