Tulsi Ram And Anr vs State Of Haryana And Anr

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Tulsi Ram And Anr vs State Of Haryana And Anr on 7 May, 2024

Author: Vikas Bahl

Bench: Vikas Bahl

                                 Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:063484




CWP-16673-2017 (O&M) and
CWP-9656-2018 (O&M)                          [1]               2024:PHHC:063484


231
      IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
                     CHANDIGARH

1.                                                 CWP-16673-2017 (O&M)
                                                   Date of decision: 07.05.2024

Tulsi Ram and another

                                                                      ...Petitioners

                                         Versus

State of Haryana and another

                                                                    ...Respondents

2.                                                 CWP-9656-2018 (O&M)
                                                   Date of decision: 07.05.2024

Murti Devi

                                                                       ...Petitioner

                                         Versus

State of Haryana and another

                                                                    ...Respondents

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKAS BAHL

Present:     Mr. Sukesh Kumar Jindal, Advocate for the petitioners.
             (In both the cases)

             Mr. Amandeep Joshi, DAG, Haryana.

             ****

VIKAS BAHL, J. (ORAL)

1. This order will dispose of abovesaid two writ petitions in which prayer has been made for issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to regularize the services of the petitioners from the date their juniors were regularized with all consequential benefits 1 of 3 ::: Downloaded on - 09-05-2024 02:34:40 ::: Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:063484 CWP-16673-2017 (O&M) and CWP-9656-2018 (O&M) [2] 2024:PHHC:063484 including arrears along with 12% interest. CWP-16673-2017 has been filed by two petitioners whereas CWP-9656-2018 has been filed by petitioner- Murti Devi.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the case of the petitioners is covered by a judgment of a Coordinate Bench of this Court decided on 13.03.2024 of which lead case is CWP-2158-2020 titled as Ashish Sharma and others Vs. State of Haryana and others and has further submitted that the petitioners would give detailed representations to the competent authority of respondent No.1-State and has prayed that the competent authority of respondent No.1-State be directed to consider the said representations in a time bound manner and while considering the same, also consider the abovesaid judgment passed by the Coordinate Bench of this Court in Ashish Sharma's case (Supra) and in case, the pleas raised by the petitioners are found to be meritorious, then, to grant necessary relief, in accordance with law.

3. Learned State Counsel has submitted that in case any such representations are given, the same would be considered by the competent authority of respondent No.1-State, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of three months from the date of receipt of the said representations.

4. Keeping in view the abovesaid facts and circumstances, the present Civil Writ Petition is disposed of with direction to the competent authority of respondent No.1-State to consider the abovesaid representations, in accordance with law, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of the abovesaid representations and while 2 of 3 ::: Downloaded on - 09-05-2024 02:34:41 ::: Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:063484 CWP-16673-2017 (O&M) and CWP-9656-2018 (O&M) [3] 2024:PHHC:063484 considering the same, also consider the abovesaid judgment passed by the Coordinate Bench of this Court in Ashish Sharma's case (Supra) and in case, the pleas raised by the petitioners are found to be meritorious, then, the competent authority would grant necessary relief, in accordance with law and in case, the competent authority is of the opinion that the pleas raised by the petitioners are not meritorious, then, a speaking order rejecting the same be passed within a period of three months from the date of receipt of the said representations.

5. This Court has not opined on the merits of the case and the competent authority of respondent No.1-State would consider the case of the petitioners independently, in accordance with law.

6. All the pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand disposed of in view of the abovesaid order.

07.05.2024                                            (VIKAS BAHL)
Pawan                                                    JUDGE

             Whether speaking/reasoned:-              Yes/No

             Whether reportable:-                     Yes/No




                                3 of 3
             ::: Downloaded on - 09-05-2024 02:34:41 :::