← Library
High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCWP/10390/2019disposed of

Laxman Singh v. State Of Haryana And Others

2021-07-08Mr. Justice Harsimran Singh Sethi3 pages

-1-

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH Date of decision: - 08.07.2021 Laxman Singh ....Petitioner

Versus

State of Haryana and others .....Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI Present:- Mr. Mukesh Rao, Advocate for the applicant-petitioner.

Ms. Shubhra Singh, Additional Advocate General, Haryana. (keeping in view the advance copy given).

( Through Video Conferencing ) **** HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI , J. (ORAL) CM-7733-CWP-2021 Present application has been filed for placing on record copy of order dated 13.05.2020 as Annexure P-15.

Application is allowed, as prayed for. Copy of order dated 13.05.2020 (Annexure P-15) is taken on record, subject to all just exceptions.

CM-7734-CWP-2021 Present application has been filed by the applicant-petitioner for disposing of the main writ petition i.e. CWP-10390-2019, which is

-2pending consideration for 22.09.2021.

Notice of the application to the counsel opposite. Ms. Shubhra Singh, Additional Advocate General, Haryana, who has joined the proceedings through video conference, accepts notice on behalf of the respondents-State and raises no objection for the grant of prayer as raised in the present application.

Keeping in view the above, the present application is allowed and the hearing of main writ petition i.e. CWP-10390-2019 is preponed from 22.09.2021 to today.

In the present writ petition, the grievance of the petitioner is that despite the fact that the petitioner was entitled to continue in service up to the age of 60 years, being a handicapped person, he was sought to be retired by the impugned order dated 29.03.2019 (Annexure P-13) on attaining the age of 58 years.

This Court while issuing notice of motion, allowed the petitioner to continue working till the age of 60 years. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has already completed the age of 60 years in March, 2021 and retired and the relief, being sought in the present writ petition, has already been awarded by him and therefore, this writ petition be disposed of having been rendered infructuous in the view of the fact that the petitioner has already rendered service up to the age of 60 years, as being prayed in the writ petition.

-3Learned State counsel does not dispute the above said facts. In view of the facts and circumstances of the present case recorded hereinbefore, once the prayer of the petitioner continued him to work up to the age of 60 years and he has continued in service till the age of 60 years, no further order is required to be passed in the present writ petition and the same is accordingly disposed of as having been rendered infructuous.

( HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI ) July 08, 2021 JUDGE naresh.k Whether reasoned/speaking?

Yes Whether reportable?

No