Sushil Kumar v. The State Of Haryana And Others

2024:PHHC:011869 CWP-1878-2024 -1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP-1878-2024 Date of Decision: 30.01.2024 Sushil Kumar

...Petitioner(s)

Versus

State of Haryana and others ...Respondent(s) CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TRIBHUVAN DAHIYA Present:- Mr. Nikhil Lather, Advocate for Mr. Shivam Malik, 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 respondent no.2 by which the petitioner has not been promoted to the post of TGT Science as against his juniors and other batchmate JBT Teachers, who have been promoted to the posts of TGT Science vide order dated 11.11.2020 (Annexure P-11). Further, a writ of mandamus has been sought directing respondent no.2 to promote the petitioner to the post of TGT Science with effect from 17.07.2018 along with all consequential benefits and interest at the rate of eighteen per cent per annum.

2.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that grievance raised herein is pending for appropriate decision before the respondents. At this PAYAL 2024.01.30 13:59 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment

2024:PHHC:011869 CWP-1878-2024 -2stage, the petitioner will be satisfied in case respondent No.2 is directed to decide the pending representation, dated 19.11.2020, Annexure P-12, 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.2 expeditiously.

5.

In view thereof, without going into merits of the case, the petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent No.2/Director, Elementary Education, Haryana, to consider and decide the pending representation dated 19.11.2020, 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 30.01.2024 Payal Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No PAYAL 2024.01.30 13:59 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment