High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCWP/5530/2019disposed of

Sanjeev Kumar And Others v. State Of Haryana And Others

2019-10-29Mr. Justice Amit Rawal2 pages

YOGESH SHARMA 2019.10.31 10:21 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-5530-2019 (O&M)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH CWP-5530-2019 (O&M) Date of decision : 29.10.2019 Sanjeev Kumar and others ... Petitioners

Versus

State of Haryana and other ... Respondents

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL

Present:

Mr. Namit Kumar, Advocate for the petitioners.

**** AMIT RAWAL, J. (ORAL) CM-16049-2019 For the reasons stated in the application, which is supported by an affidavit, Annexures P-9 & P-10 are taken on record, subject to all just exceptions.

CM stands disposed of.

MAIN CASE Petitioners are seeking indulgence of this Court for issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to transfer the petitioners from Government Railway Police to District Police, as they are working in the GRP from the year 2007 onwards, whereas another batch of about 300 constables appointed in the year 2004 was transferred from GRP to District Police in the year 2006 i.e. after two years of their appointment. In this regard, had submitted legal notice dated 04.08.2018 (Annexure P-8),

YOGESH SHARMA 2019.10.31 10:21 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-5530-2019 (O&M) but there is no adherence thereto.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that they will be satisfied if a direction is issued to respondent No.2-Director General of Police, Sector 6 Panchkula, Haryana, to consider the legal notice dated 04.08.2018 (Annexure P-8), within a stipulated period. Without going into the merits and demerits of the claim of the petitioners, I deem it appropriate to direct respondent No.2, to consider the legal notice dated 04.08.2018 (Annexure P-8), within a period of two months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order and shall pass a speaking order thereon after affording opportunity of hearing to petitioners, failing which, respondent No.2, shall be liable to pay costs of `25,000/- to petitioners.

This condition of imposing costs is only to prevent petitioners to run from pillar to post and avail remedy of contempt in case of noncompliance of directions issued by this Court. The writ petition stands disposed of with the above direction. ( AMIT RAWAL ) JUDGE 29.10.2019 Yogesh Sharma Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/ No Whether Reportable Yes/ No