Bahadur Singh v. Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd And Others



     137 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP No.3968 of 2020(O&M) Date of Decision: 21.03.2022 Bahadur Singh -Petitioner

Versus

Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd. and others-Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJ MOHAN SINGH

Present:

Mr. Satvir Singh, Advocate for the petitioner.

**** RAJ MOHAN SINGH, J. (Oral) The case has been taken up for hearing through video conferencing.

Petitioner has preferred this petition for the issuance of writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing office order No.459 dated 02.07.2013 (Annexure P-3) and office order No.752 dated 03.11.2016 (Annexure P-5), vide which two annual increments of the petitioner were stopped with future effect. At the very outset, learned counsel for the petitioner by relying upon order dated 20.12.2021 passed in CWP No.26002 of 2021 titled Madan Lal Sharma Vs. Punjab State Power Corporation Limited and others submits that legal notice got issued by the petitioner on 01.11.2019 be ordered to be decided by respondent No.1 in accordance with law.

Learned counsel for the petitioner could not point out PRINCE SAINI 2022.03.21 17:01 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document



     whether the petitioner has a statutory remedy in the form of aforesaid legal notice and whether the same suffers from delay and latches as well.

Evidently, appeal of the petitioner was also dismissed by the Joint Secretary/Technical-I, PSPCL, Patiala vide the impugned letter dated 03.11.2016 and thereafter, the petitioner got issued the legal notice on 01.11.2019.

At this stage, without meaning anything on the nature of legal notice, I deem it appropriate to dispose of the present writ petition even without issuing notice of motion as the same would further delay the disposal of the case unnecessarily. Respondent No.1 shall consider the legal notice strictly in accordance with law without being influenced by any statement of fact recorded hereinabove. Respondent No.1 shall also be at liberty to consider whether legal notice suffers delay and latches or not. In any case, the claim as espoused by the petitioner shall be considered in accordance with law, preferably within a period of one month from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. Disposed of.

21.03.2022 (RAJ MOHAN SINGH) Prince JUDGE 1.

Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes/No 2.

Whether reportable :

Yes/No PRINCE SAINI 2022.03.21 17:01 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document