Punjab-Haryana High Court
Amit Kumar vs State Of Haryana And Others on 22 December, 2023
Author: Harsimran Singh Sethi
Bench: Harsimran Singh Sethi
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:165418
CWP-29289-2023 2023:PHHC:165418 1
123
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
CWP-29289-2023
Date of Decision: 22.12.2023
AMIT KUMAR
...Petitioner
Vs.
STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS
...Respondents
CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI
Present: Mr. Mazlish Khan, Advocate for the petitioner.
HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI, J. (Oral)
In the present petition grievance of the petitioner is that the claim of the petitioner was rejected by the impugned order Annexure P-13 dated 18.10.2022, the question of law raised in the present petition came to be decided while deciding CWP No.8864 of 2023, Vijender and others Vs. State of Haryana and others and other connected cases decided on 17.08.2023 and the claim of the petitioner also needs to be considered in view of the direction given in the said judgment. Hence, the petitioner be given liberty to approach the Department to consider the claim of the petitioner as per the directions in Vijender and others (supra).
2. Notice of motion.
3. On the asking of the Court, Mr. Tapan Kumar Yadav, learned Assistant Advocate General, Haryana, who is present in Court, accepts notice on behalf of the respondent-State.
4. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that in case any representation will be received from the petitioner placing reliance on 1 of 2 ::: Downloaded on - 23-12-2023 06:36:11 ::: Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:165418 CWP-29289-2023 2023:PHHC:165418 2 Vijender and others (supra) passed by this Court to claim the relief, the same will be decided by the competent authority and appropriate order will be passed within a period of eight weeks of the receipt of certified copy of this order by passing an appropriate speaking order.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that keeping in view the statement of learned State counsel, the present petition may kindly be disposed of having been not pressed any further with liberty to file appropriate representation on the basis of the judgment in Vijender and others (supra).
6. Ordered accordingly.
(HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI)
(JUDGE)
22.12.2023
kv
Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No
Whether reportable : Yes/No
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:165418 2 of 2 ::: Downloaded on - 23-12-2023 06:36:11 :::