Sarabjit Singh Shergil vs State Of Punjab Th Secy. To Govt. Pb. Dep. ...
2024 Latest Caselaw 9093 P&H

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Sarabjit Singh Shergil vs State Of Punjab Th Secy. To Govt. Pb. Dep. ... on 29 April, 2024

               CWP-10298-2016                         2024:PHHC: 057844                              1

                                   IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA
                                              AT CHANDIGARH
               220
                                                                      CWP-10298-2016
                                                                      Date of decision: 29.04.2024

               Sarabjit Singh Shergil                                              ...Petitioner
                                                             Versus

               State of Punjab and another                                        ...Respondents

               CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMAN CHAUDHARY
                                                  *****

Present : None for the petitioner.

Mr. Manipal Singh Atwal, DAG, Punjab.

***** AMAN CHAUDHARY. J (Oral)

1. The prayer made in the present petition is for directing the

respondents to grant five increments admissible on notional basis from the

date of joining for five years service rendered as Short Commissioned

Officer.

2. Learned State counsel refers to the rejoinder to the replication, as

per which the petitioner was required to provide certain documents, the

relevant para 6 thereof reads thus:-

"6. That the petitioner requested the answering respondent, vide letter no. 213 dated 14.09.2018, to grant revise sanction against time barred claim. In pursuance of which, the answering department, vide letter no. Accounts- 6/SS/2018/49882 dated 11.10.2018, directed the petitioner to provide original bill, performa for time barred claim, reasons for delay and official/officer responsible for same. But the petitioner has not replied to the letter till date. A reminder letter no. Accounts- 6/SS/2018/2746 dated 07.02.2019 has been again issued to the petitioner by the answering department, proving that the petitioner is himself responsible for the delay and trying to mislead the Hon'ble Court by putting the blame on answering department. A copy of the letter dated 11.010.2018 and 07.02.2019 is annexed as Annexure R-2 and Annexure R-3 respectively."

3. There is no representation on behalf of the petitioner, despite the

case having been called out twice.

integrity of this order/judgment

4. It appears that the petitioner has lost interest in pursuing the

present case.

5. Dismissed for non-prosecution.

(AMAN CHAUDHARY) JUDGE 29.04.2024 Hemant

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

integrity of this order/judgment