Rajiv Awasthi vs State Of Punjab And Others

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Rajiv Awasthi vs State Of Punjab And Others on 20 March, 2024

Author: Anil Kshetarpal

Bench: Anil Kshetarpal

                     132                                                            2024:PHHC:040259



                               In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana, at Chandigarh


                                               Review Application No. CW-303 of 2023 (O&M)
                                                      In Civil Writ Petition No. 16189 of 2014

                                                                     Date of Decision: 20.03.2024


                     Rajiv Awasthi
                                                                                     ... Petitioner(s)

                                                         Versus

                     State of Punjab and Others
                                                                                  ... Respondent(s)

                     CORAM: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Anil Kshetarpal.

                     Present:      Mr. Kanav Singla, Assistant Advocate General,
                                   Punjab, for the review applicant/respondent No.1 to 3.

                                   Mr. Baldev Singh Mann, Advocate
                                   for the non-applicant/petitioner.

                     Anil Kshetarpal, J.

CM-14996-CWP-2023

1. For the reasons stated in the application, the same is allowed and delay of 201 days in filing the review application is condoned. RA-CW-303-2023

2. This is a review application filed by the State of Punjab. The learned counsel representing the parties have been heard at length.

3. The learned State counsel submits that there is an apparent error in the judgment passed by this Court as the petitioner was promoted as a Senior Scale Stenographer on 07.10.2014 and thereafter, he was promoted as a Personal Assistant on 06.04.2021. He further submits that on 31.05.2012, respondent No.4 to 9 were also promoted, however, the petitioner was not DEEPAK KUMAR BHARDWAJ 2024.03.22 15:34 found eligible.

I attest to the accuracy and

integrity of this document

2024:PHHC:040259 Review Application No. CW-303 of 2023 (O&M) 2 In Civil Writ Petition No. 16189 of 2014

4. On the other hand, the learned counsel representing the non- applicant/petitioner submits that on 31.05.2012, six Junior Scale Stenographers were promoted against the posts of Personal Assistant as a stop gap arrangement for the limited purpose of drawing their salaries only. He further submits that as many as six Junior Scale Stenographers were regularly promoted as Senior Scale Stenographers on 07.06.2013 w.e.f. 10.05.2013 on which date, the petitioner was eligible being the senior most. However, his case was not considered.

5. Despite granting an opportunity, the learned State counsel has failed to controvert the aforesaid facts. No ground is made out to review the order dated 10.01.2023. Hence, the present review application is dismissed.

6. The miscellaneous application(s) pending, if any, shall stand disposed of.

(Anil Kshetarpal) Judge March 20, 2024 "DK"

                               Whether speaking/reasoned :Yes/No
                               Whether reportable            : Yes/No




DEEPAK KUMAR BHARDWAJ
2024.03.22 15:34
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document