Punam v. State Of Haryana And Another

2024:PHHC:005208 CWP-994-2024 -1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP-994-2024 Date of Decision: 16.01.2024 Punam

...Petitioner(s)

Versus

State of Haryana and another ...Respondent(s) CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TRIBHUVAN DAHIYA Present:- Mr. Rohit Mittal, Advocate for the petitioner Ms. Tanushree Gupta, DAG, Haryana *** TRIBHUVAN DAHIYA, J. (Oral) This petition has been filed, inter alia, seeking a writ of certiorari quashing the action of the respondent-Commission not to consider the petitioner for benefit of notional pay fixation and seniority granted to newly appointed PGT mathematics with effect from 06.03.2019, i.e., the date when her juniors have been appointed to the post of PGT Mathematics whereas similarly placed other candidates have been granted the said benefit vide orders dated 28.02.2022 and 02.03.2022, Annexures P-4 & P-5 respectively. Further, a direction has been sought to the respondent Department to decide the representation, Annexure P-7, of the petitioner. 2.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that grievance raised herein is pending for appropriate decision before the respondents. At this PAYAL 2024.01.18 17:18 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment

2024:PHHC:005208 CWP-994-2024 -2stage, the petitioner will be satisfied in case respondent No.1 is directed to decide the pending representation, Annexure P-7, in a specified period. 3.

Notice of motion.

4.

Ms. Tanushree Gupta, DAG, Haryana, appearing on advance notice, submits that the pending representation shall be decided by respondent No.1 expeditiously.

5.

In view thereof, without going into merits of the case, the petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent No.1/Additional Chief Secretary, School Education Department, Haryana, to consider and decide the pending representation, Annexure P-7, by passing a speaking order in accordance with law, within a period of three months from the date of receiving a certified copy of this order.

6.

In case the order is not passed within the stipulated period, the officer concerned shall pay costs of ₹25,000 to the petitioner. (TRIBHUVAN DAHIYA) JUDGE 16.01.2024 Payal Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No PAYAL 2024.01.18 17:18 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment