Punjab-Haryana High Court
Pawan vs Pt. B.D. Sharma University Of Health ... on 5 April, 2024
CWP-7639-2024 1 2024: PHHC:046710 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Sr. No.110 CWP-7639-2024 Date of Decision: 05.04.2024 Pawan .... Petitioner Versus Pt. B.D.Sharma University of Health Sciences, Rohtak ... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TRIBHUVAN DAHTYA Present: Mr. Saurabh Dalal, Advocate for the petitioner. ok TRIBHUVAN DAHIYA, J. (ORAL)
This petition has been filed seeking a writ of mandamus directing the respondent to grant pay and continuity of service along with other service benefits to the petitioner for the period he was wrongly kept out of service.
2. Briefly, as per facts apparent on record, the petitioner was initially appointed as Medical Record Clerk in the University, vide appointment letter dated 15.09.2017, Annexure P-1. It is claimed that he joined service on 19.09.2017, and after working for four days, was relieved from duty on 25.09.2017. After decision of this Court dated 28.03.2018 rendered in CWP No.24142 of 2017 titled Gaurav v. Pt. B.D.Sharma University and others, Annexure P-2, whereby selection of a candidate namely Neelam as Medical Records Clerk in BC-A category was quashed. The University was directed to either conduct a screening test for the post in question or hold the interviews afresh. Accordingly, interviews were conducted afresh, and the petitioner was again appointed as Medical Record Clerk in general category, vide appointment letter dated 14.02.2020, Annexure P-3. After working on the post for about four years, he submitted a representation, dated 09.01.2024, Annexure P-4, for grant of pay and other service benefits for the period he was allegedly kept out of service. No decision on the representation was conveyed, and he filed the MANINDER . . «gs 2024.04.10.16:21 Instant writ petition.
I attest to the accuracy an authenticity of this order/judgment.
CWP-7639-2024 2 2024: PHHC:046710
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that the petitioner was duly appointed as Medical Record Clerk and joined service on 19.09.2017, but was not allowed to work for no fault of his. After his appointment on the post again on 14.02.2020, he is entitled to the benefit for the period he was kept out of job.
4. Concededly, the petitioner, who belongs to general category, never challenged his removal from service pursuant to his appointment, vide letter dated 15.09.2017. The writ petition, CWP No.24142 of 2017, pursuant to which fresh interviews had been conducted was filed to challenge the appointment of another candidate under BC-A category. The petitioner has no concern with the same, nor was he a party to the proceedings. He has again been appointed to the post based upon fresh process of selection, vide letter of appointment dated 14.02.2020. The offer was accepted, and he joined the service as Medical Record Clerk. It was only after about four years that he thought of raising the claim for service benefits for the period between his first and the second appointment. The claim is not sustainable on two counts; /irstly, there is nothing to establish that the petitioner's appointment to the post on 14.02.2020, was a result of his earlier removal having been declared illegal. In fact, he did not even challenge his removal from the post, nor was it held illegal by a Court of law in any other proceedings. Therefore, it cannot be said that he was prevented from working on the post. Secondly, it is a stale claim having been raised after more than four years of unexplained delay.
5. In view thereof, the petition cannot be entertained, and it stands dismissed in limine.
(TRIBHUVAN DAHTYA) JUDGE 05.04.2024 Maninder Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes 7024.04 109 16:24, racy and Whether reportable Yes authenticity of this order/judgment.