Subhash Chand vs State Of Haryana And Anr
2022 Latest Caselaw 1313 P&H

208 (2ndcase)
       IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
                      CHANDIGARH
                                  CM-5634-CWP-2018 in/and
                                               CWP-447-2011
                                  Date of decision: 08.03.2022

Subhash Chand                                                ...Petitioner
                                         V/S
State of Haryana and another                                 ...Respondents

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN MONGA

Present:     Mr. R.K.Malik, Senior Advocate with
             Mr. Sunil Hooda, Advocate,
             for the applicant/petitioner.

             Ms. Kirti Singh, DAG, Haryana.
                   ****

ARUN MONGA, J. (ORAL)

CM-5634-CWP-2018

This is an application seeking disposal of the main writ petition

which was adjourned sine die to await the decision of the Supreme Court in

Civil Appeal No.7295 of 2012; State of Haryana Vs. Viklang Sangh. Learned

Senior counsel for the applicant submits that since the controversy has already

been settled by the Hon'ble Supreme Court vide its judgment dated 08.10.2013

passed in civil Appeal No.9096 of 2013, the main case be taken up on Board

today itself and may be disposed of accordingly.

For the reasons stated in the application, the main case is taken up

on Board for hearing today itself.

Main case

Petitioner herein, inter alia, seeks issuance of a writ in the nature

of mandamus directing the respondents to grant him promotion as Assistant by

giving the benefit of reservation of 3% in handicapped category from the due

date along with all consequential benefits.

2. Learned Senior counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner

was appointed as Clerk. He belongs to handicapped category. He submits that 1 of 3

case of the petitioner is squarely covered by the decision rendered in CWP

No.12741 of 2009 decided on 18.03.2010 (Annexure P-1), but yet the judgment

therein has not been implemented qua the petitioner herein. Therefore, the

action of the respondents not to implement the decision qua all the similarly

situated persons is illegal. He submitted representation but to no avail.

3. Learned Senior counsel points out that against the order/judgment

dated 18.03.2010 (Annexure P-1), the State of Haryana filed an SLP and the

present case was adjourned sine die. He submits that the controversy has now

been settled by Apex Court vide judgment dated 08.10.2013 rendered in Civil

Appeal No.9096 of 2013. In the light thereof, State reconsidered the matter. A

decision was thus taken that 3% posts be reserved for promotion to Group A. B,

C, D w.e.f. the date of Persons With Disability Act came into force. Reliance is

also placed on Union of India Notification dated 17/19.4.2017 appended as

Annexure P-6 as well as Notification dated 11.08.2017 (Annexure P-7) issued

by the Chief Secretary of state.

4. On advance service, learned State counsel appears and submits

that competent authorityshall take decision either way, on the pending

representation of the petitioner, in due course.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner also agrees that let a

finaldecision be taken, by the competent authority on the pending

representation by keeping in view Notifications dated 17/19.04.2017 and

11.08.2017 contained at Annexures P-6 and P-7.

6. Given the nature of order being passed, there is no necessity to

seek return by any of the respondents as no further proceedings and/or

pleadings are required.

7. Without commenting on the merits of the case, the writ petition is

disposed of with a direction to the competent authority to look into the

grievance of the petitioner and by treating the present writ petition as

2 of 3

supplementary representation and take a decision, in accordance with law, in

the light of administrative instructions issued by the State of Haryana contained

at Annexures P-6 and P-7 respectively.

8. Let the needful be done within a period of 45 days from today.

9. In case favorable order is passed, the same shall be implemented

within a period of 45 days thereafter.

10. Disposed of accordingly.

11. Pending application if any, also stands disposed of.

08.03.2022                                      (ARUN MONGA)
vandana                                             JUDGE

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




                                3 of 3