Paramjit Singh vs Dr. B.R. Ambedkar Regional Engineering ...
2024 Latest Caselaw 17673 P&H

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Paramjit Singh vs Dr. B.R. Ambedkar Regional Engineering ... on 23 September, 2024

Author: Harsimran Singh Sethi

Bench: Harsimran Singh Sethi

                                       Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:125791



CWP No.24489-2024(O&M)                 1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
             CHANDIGARH


(136)                                    CWP No.24489-2024(O&M)
                                       DATE OF DECISION: 23.09.2024


Paramjit Singh                                              ............Petitioner


VERSUS


Dr.B.R.Ambedkar Regional Engineering College,
Jalandhar and others                                        ..............Respondents


CORAM         HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI

Present       Mr.Rajeev K. Sharma, Advocate,
              for the petitioner.

              Mr. Charanpreet Singh, AAG, Punjab.
              ***

HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI, J (ORAL)

1. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the services of the

petitioner are not being regularized despite the fact that the benefit has been

given to the similarly situated employees keeping in view the order passed by

the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in CWP-6398-1999, titled Ashok Kumar

and others v. Dr.B.R.Ambedkar Regional Engineering College, decided on

18.09.2013, which judgment has also been upheld by the Division Bench of this

Court in LPA No.436 of 2014, titled as Dr.B.R.Ambedkar Regional

Engineering College, Jalandhar v. Ashok Kumar and others, decided on

21.03.2014.

2. Learned counsel submits that even the Special Leave Petition as

filed, has also been dismissed and, therefore, once, the benefit of regularization

1 of 2

Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:125791

has been given to the similarly situated employees, the petitioner should have

also be extended the same benefit.

3. Notice of motion.

4. On the asking of the Court, Mr. Charanpreet Singh, AAG, Punjab,

who is present in Court, accepts notice on behalf of the respondent-State.

5. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that in case any

representation is received from the petitioners, the claim of the petitioners will

be considered as per the judgment in Ashok Kumar's case (supra) and

appropriate order will be passed within a period of eight weeks from the receipt

of any such representation and in case, it is found granted otherwise feasible,

the request of the petitioner will be accepted, otherwise due reasons will be

given while passing the order on the representation for not accepting the request

of the petitioner and the same will be conveyed to the petitioner.

6. Learned counsel for the petitioner 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 file appropriate

representation raising the claim before the authority.

7. Ordered accordingly.

23.09.2024                                       (HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI)
mamta                                                    JUDGE

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




                                        2 of 2