Baje Singh v. State Of Haryana Etc

Sr. No.637

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

CWP-6493-2000 (O&M) Date of decision: 23.05.2022 Baje Singh

...Petitioner

Vs.

State of Haryana and others

...Respondents

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN MONGA

Present:

None for the petitioner.

Mr. R.D.Sharma, DAG, Haryana.

*** ARUN MONGA, J. (ORAL) Petition herein, inter alia, is for issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to give effect of promotion, fixation of pay thereto and all other benefits accrued to him for the purpose of pension. 2.

Petition was admitted on 06.08.2001.

3.

When called out for hearing,there is no representation on behalf of the petitioner.It seems that by sheer effluxion of time and pendency of the writ petition for more than 21 years before this Court, either it has been rendered infructuous or even otherwise the petitioner seems to have lost interest in pursuing the same. 4.

In any case, it appears that even on merits, claim of the petitioner is not admissible in view of the following stand taken in para 1 of the preliminary objectionsofthe reply, which is reproduced herein below for ready reference:- "1.

That the period of emergency was from 19.09.63 to 10.01.68 and the petitioner is entitled for getting the relief of emergency services. The answering respondent has given the relief to the petitioner for 4 years, three months and 21 days. The petitioner's seniority is towards the Delhi depot and this relief is to be given by the Delhi depot and Sh. Jagdish Chander's seniority falls in the Rohtak depot hence the petitioner has distorted the facts that he is senior to Jagdish Chander and the petitioner is also well aware of this." VANDANA 2022.05.25 21:14 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

5.

On a Court query, learned State counsel submits that as stated in the written statement, relief sought by the petitioner that his services rendered under the Armed Forces during work emergency arisen 1963 to 1968 was already accorded to him interms of the decree and judgment dated 01.09.1992 passed by the Appellate Court annexed as Annexure P-9 of the writ petition. 6.

I am in agreement with the stand taken by the respondents as aforesaid. Neither any replication has been filed to the afore noted stand of the respondents nor any additional affidavit of any kind to controvert the same. 7.

In view of the aforesaid, no grounds are made out to interfere. 8.

Dismissed.

23.05.2022 (ARUN MONGA) vandana JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned:

Yes/No Whether reportable:

Yes/No VANDANA 2022.05.25 21:14 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document