Nishan Chand v. State Of Punjab And Others
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH CWP No. 10625 of 2023 Date of decision : May 17, 2023 Nishan Chand ...... Petitioners
Versus
State of Punjab and others ...... Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE PANKAJ JAIN *** Present :-Mr. Yashpal Markan, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. Aman Dhir, DAG., Punjab.
*** PANKAJ JAIN, J. (ORAL) 1.
The present petition has been filed seeking writ in the nature of mandamus directing the official respondents to consider the claim of the petitioner for the arrears of wages, seniority of benefit, continuous period of service etc. on the ground that one Ashwani Kalia who was junior to the petitioner already stood promoted on 22.03.2012 whereas the petitioner has been promoted on 25.04.2022.
2.
In somewhat similar circumstances, the Apex Court in the case of P. S. Sadasivaswamy Vs. State of Tamil Nadu reported as (1975) 1 SCC 152 held as under:- "2.
!
"
#$ % # % "
& #$ ' " #(
"
' ) " #* "" ' ) (
+ ' " "
" " #,
) " " ' " )
)- (
+ "
)
" "
' " #. / "
# " " #*
0" '
0" 0#1 $
#2 3.
Same was further relied upon by the Apex Court in the case of Union of India and others Vs. Chaman Rana reported as (2018) 5 SCC 798.
"8. 3"
/ ""
"
" / " # "
4 5 / "
#6 # 667#.
"" "
" "#* /
/ #.
'
/ "
%
#& 0 /
""
#( "
"" "" # (
/ "
"" /"
" "
" " # XX XX XX
16. * " " /
"
" " ! 6 / % " "
" #. " $ ' " #"
4.
Keeping in view the fact that the person junior to the petitioner was promoted in the year 2012 and the petitioner opted not to agitate his claim for promotion till the year 2022 when he was promoted. 5.
In the considered opinion of this Court, no mandamus as claimed by the petitioner can be granted and this won't be a case wherein this Court would interfere while exercising writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
6.
Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed.
( PANKAJ JAIN ) JUDGE May 17, 2023 archana Whether speaking/reasoned Yes Whether Reportable :
No