Punjab-Haryana High Court
Bachittar Singh And Others vs State Of Punjab And Other on 30 September, 2024
Author: Harsimran Singh Sethi
Bench: Harsimran Singh Sethi
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:129768
CM-15755-CWP-2024 in/and
CWP-24398-2023 (O&M)
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
(113) CM-15755-CWP-2024 in/and
CWP-24398-2023 (O&M)
Date of Decision : 30.09.2024
Bachittar Singh and others
...Petitioners
Versus
State of Punjab and others
...Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI
Present: Mr. Deepak Gupta, Advocate for the petitioners.
Mr. T.P.S. Chawla, Senior Deputy Advocate General, Punjab.
***
Harsimran Singh Sethi J. (Oral)
CM-15755-CWP-2024
Present application has been filed for preponing the date of
hearing of the CM-6794-2024, which stands adjourned to 18.12.2024.
Notice of the application to the counsel opposite.
Mr. Deepak Gupta, Advocate, who appears on behalf of the
petitioners, accepts notice and raises no objection for the grant of prayer as
raised in the present application.
Keeping in view the above, application is allowed and the
hearing of the CM-6794-2024 is preponed from 18.12.2024 to today.
Further, on joint request of learned counsel for the parties, main
petition is also preponed for today and taken up for final disposal.
CWP-24398-2023 (O&M)
1 of 3
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:129768
CM-15755-CWP-2024 in/and
CWP-24398-2023 (O&M)
In the present petition, the grievance being raised by the
petitioners is that the petitioners are not being allowed to mark their presence
and to perform their duties and they are not being considered for
regularization of their services as per the Police issued by the Government of
Punjab.
Upon notice of motion, the respondents have filed the reply,
wherein, they have disputed the master and servant relationship between the
petitioners and the department. As per the reply, the petitioners are the
employees of an Outsource Agency i.e. respondent No. 13, who has been
arrayed in the present petition. Further, the respondents have relied upon the
judgment of a Division Bench of this Court in Nishan Singh and others Vs.
State of Punjab and others, 2014 (11) RCR (Civil) 262 to hold that
outsourcing employees are not entitled for consideration for regularization of
their services.
Faced with this situation, learned counsel for the petitioners
submits that though, there was an interim order passed in favour of the
petitioners by the Co-ordinate Bench on 06.11.2023, the respondents be
directed to release the salary of the petitioners.
Learned counsel for the respondents submits that in case, any
representation is received from the petitioners with regard to salary for any
period, the same will be considered in accordance with law and an
appropriate speaking order will be passed within a period of eight weeks of
the receipt of any such claim and in case, any salary is found admissible to
the petitioners, the same will be released, otherwise due reasons will be
2 of 3
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:129768
CM-15755-CWP-2024 in/and
CWP-24398-2023 (O&M)
mentioned in the speaking order for not accepting the claim, which will be
conveyed to the petitioners.
Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that in view of the
statement of learned State counsel, the present petition may kindly be
disposed of having been not pressed any further with liberty to the petitioners
to raise grievance with regard to the continuous in service by raising
grievance before the appropriate forum.
Ordered accordingly.
Pending miscellaneous application, if any, also stands disposed
of.
September 30, 2024 (HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI)
kanchan JUDGE
Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes
Whether reportable : No
3 of 3
