Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

CHARAT SINGH versus SHRI D.S. JASPAL & ORS.

High Court of Punjab and Haryana, Chandigarh

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Charat Singh v. Shri D.S. Jaspal & Ors. - COCP-349-2006 [2006] RD-P&H 7241 (15 September 2006)

COCP No.349 of 2006 -: 1 :-

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

COCP No.349 of 2006

Date of decision: September 21, 2006.

Charat Singh

...Petitioner(s)

v.

Shri D.S. Jaspal & Ors.

...Respondent(s)

Present: Shri Baltej Singh Sidhu, Advocate for the petitioner.

Shri G.S. Cheema, Sr. Dy. Advocate General, Punjab.

Surya Kant, J. (Oral)

The petitioner filed CWP No.14886 of 2005, which was disposed of by this Court on 19.9.2005 with a direction to the appropriate authority to dispose of the petitioner's representation by passing a speaking order and if an adverse order was to be passed, not to give effect to the same for one month.

In compliance to the aforesaid directions, the respondents, firstly, passed an order dated 18.11.2005 (Annexure P-3) whereby the petitioner was informed that his case for regularization of services was under consideration and a final decision in that regard shall be taken by the Chairman, Screening Review Committee.

The petitioner then filed this contempt petition and in response to the show cause, all the respondents have filed their respective affidavits.

Along with his affidavit dated 20.5.2006, Shri K.R. Lakhanpal, Chief COCP No.349 of 2006 -: 2 :-

Secretary to Govt. Punjab, has appended another order dated 18.5.2006 by the Divisional Forest Officer, Faridkot Forest Division, Muktsar (Annexure R-5/II) vide which the petitioner's case for regularization of his services has been considered and turned down for the reasons mentioned in the said order.

In this view of the matter, this petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to impugn the orders 18.11.2005 and 18.5.2006, referred to above, passed by the respondent-authorities in compliance to the directions issued by this court.

Rule discharged.

September 21, 2006. [ Surya Kant ]

kadyan 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.