Yog Bala vs State Of Haryana And Others
2023 Latest Caselaw 11186 P&H

CWP-16101-2023 1
2023:PHHC:096468

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH

Sr. No.125 CWP-16101-2023
Date of Decision: 28.07.2023

Yog Bala .... Petitioner
Versus

State of Haryana and others ... Respondents

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TRIBHUVAN DAHITYA

Present: Mr. Jawahar Lal Goyal, Advocate for the petitioner.
3 2k 3

TRIBHUVAN DAHIYA, J. (ORAL)

This petition has been filed seeking a writ of mandamus directing the respondent-Department to consider the petitioner's claim for treating the period from 01.05.1998 to 24.08.1998 as duty period, and to step-up her pay at par with that of the juniors.

2. After arguing for some time, finding that the Court is not inclined to entertain the petition, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he does not press the said claims.

3. The petition qua the aforesaid claims is, accordingly, dismissed as not pressed.

4. Learned counsel further submits that another claim of the petitioner regarding grant of benefit of continuity of service by treating the period from 07.10.1997 to 30.04.1998, when she worked on contract basis in the Department, as continuous service for all intents and purposes, is pending with the respondents. It is further submitted that this relief has already been granted by the respondents to similarly placed employees Surinder Singh and Balraj Singh, vide order dated 16.05.2005

(Annexure P-7) by counting their contract service. A representation to that SeaE RS 134s I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment.

CWP-16101-2023 2 2023:PHHC:096468

effect, dated 24.03.2022 (Annexure P-22), has already been submitted, and the petitioner would be satisfied in case the respondents are directed to take appropriate decision on her representation in the light of order, dated 16.05.2005, passed by them in the case of similarly placed employees.

5. Notice of motion.

6. Ms. Tanushree Gupta, Deputy Advocate General, Haryana, accepts notice on behalf of respondents No.1 to 3, and submits that the pending representation dated 24.03.2022 shall be decided by taking appropriate action thereupon in the light of order dated 16.05.2005.

7. In view thereof, without going into the merits of the case, the petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent No.3-District Elementary Education Officer, to consider and decide the pending representation, dated 24.03.2022, by passing a speaking order thereupon,

within a period of eight weeks from the date of receiving a certified copy of

this order.

(TRIBHUVAN DAHTYA) JUDGE 28.07.2023 Maninder Whether speaking/reasoned__:: Yes/No

Whether reportable : Yes/No

MANINDER

2023.08.03 13:45

I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment.