Amit Kumar v. Haryana Staff Selection Commission And Another

CWP-12072-2021 -1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP-12072-2021 Date of decision: - 08.07.2021 Amit Kumar ....Petitioner

Versus

Haryana Staff Selection Commission and another .....Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI Present:- Mr. R.K. Malik, Senior Advocate with Mr. Sandeep Dhull, Advocate for the petitioner.

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

( Through Video Conferencing ) *** HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI, J. (ORAL) In the present writ petition, the grievance as being raised by learned Senior counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner is that in the written examination, the petitioner has secured 87 marks and he had also worked in a Company, namely, Ralson (India) Ltd., but no benefit of marks of experience have been awarded to him. Learned Senior counsel for the petitioner submits that if eight marks for experience, which according to the petitioner he is entitled for would have been awarded to him, he would have made the grade as the last selected candidate in the category in which the petitioner competing for appointment to the post of Lower Division Clerk, had obtained 90 marks.

NARESH KUMAR 2021.07.08 16:53 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CWP-12072-2021 -2Learned Senior counsel further submits that for the relief, which is being claimed in the present writ petition, petitioner has served a legal notice/demand notice dated 18.05.2021 (Annexure P-4), which is still pending consideration with the respondents and the petitioner will be satisfied, at this stage, in case a time bound direction is issued to respondent No.1 to decide the said legal notice/demand notice by passing an appropriate speaking order.

Notice of motion.

Ms. Shubhra Singh, Additional Advocate General, Haryana, who has joined the proceedings through video conference, keeping in view the service of advance copy of petition, accepts notice on behalf of respondent-State and raises no objection with regard to prayer of the petitioner for deciding the legal notice/demand notice dated 18.05.2021 (Annexure P-4) by respondent No.1 in a time bound manner by passing an appropriate speaking order.

In view of the above, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case or the claim being made by the petitioner in legal notice/demand notice dated 18.05.2021 (P-4), respondent No.1 is directed to decide the legal notice/demand notice dated 18.05.2021 (Annexure P-4) by passing a speaking order within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Present writ petition stands disposed of.

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

Yes Whether reportable?

No NARESH KUMAR 2021.07.08 16:53 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document