Punjab-Haryana High Court
Paramjeet Singh vs State Of Haryana And Others on 14 March, 2024
Author: Vikas Bahl
Bench: Vikas Bahl
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:036409
CM-4288-CWP-2024 in/and
CWP-9088-2023 (O&M) [1] 2024:PHHC:036409
108
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
CM-4288-CWP-2024 in/and
CWP-9088-2023 (O&M)
Date of decision: 14.03.2024
Paramjeet Singh
...Petitioner
Versus
State of Haryana and others
...Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKAS BAHL
Present: Mr. Parminder Singh, Advocate for the petitioner.
Ms. Rajni Gupta, Addl. A.G., Haryana.
****
VIKAS BAHL, J. (ORAL)
CM-4288-CWP-2024
1. This is an application filed under Section 151 CPC for
preponement of the date of hearing in the main case from 17.07.2024 to an
early date.
2. For the reasons stated in the application, the same is allowed
and the date of hearing in the main case is preponed from 17.07.2024 to
today and same is taken on Board today itself for final disposal.
Main case
1. This is a Civil Writ Petition filed under Article 226/227 of the
Constitution of India for the issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus
directing the respondents to appoint and permit the petitioner to join the
1 of 3
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:036409
CM-4288-CWP-2024 in/and
CWP-9088-2023 (O&M) [2] 2024:PHHC:036409
duties in the light of offer letter dated 01.02.2023 (Annexure P-4) on the
post of Driver-ERV having selected in pursuance to the advertisement dated
23.12.2022 (Annexure P-2).
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that in the
present case, primary reason for not appointing the petitioner was the fact
that in FIR No.127 dated 24.03.2015 registered under Sections 148, 149,
323, 324, 506 of IPC, the petitioner had been summoned under Section 319
Cr.P.C.. It is further submitted that vide judgment dated 12.02.2024, the
petitioner along with other accused have been acquitted in the said case and
copy of the said judgment dated 12.02.2024 has been annexed as Annexure
P-8. It is contended that at any rate, the competent authority of respondents
be directed to reconsider the matter in the light of the subsequent facts of
the petitioner having been acquitted vide abovesaid judgment.
3. Learned State Counsel has submitted that in view of the said
fact, the competent authority of respondent No.1-State would reconsider the
matter within a period of two months from today, in accordance with law.
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 reconsider the matter, in accordance
with law, within a period of two months from today and in case, the pleas
raised by the petitioner 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
petitioner are not meritorious, then, a speaking order rejecting the same be
passed within a period of two months from today.
2 of 3
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:036409
CM-4288-CWP-2024 in/and
CWP-9088-2023 (O&M) [3] 2024:PHHC:036409
5. This Court has not opined on the merits of the case and the
competent authority of respondent No.1-State would reconsider the case of
the petitioner independently, in accordance with law.
6. All the pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand
disposed of in view of the abovesaid order.
14.03.2024 (VIKAS BAHL)
Pawan JUDGE
Whether speaking/reasoned:- Yes/No
Whether reportable:- Yes/No
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:036409
3 of 3
