Sudhir Kumar v. Haryana Staff Selection Commission And Other

CWP No. 11937 of 2020 -1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP No. 11937 of 2020 (O&M) Date of decision : 17.8.2020 ...

Sudhir Kumar ................Petitioner vs.

Haryana Staff Selection Commission, Panchkula through its Secretary and others .................Respondents Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice H. S. Madaan Present: Mr. R.K. Malik, Senior Advocate wsith Mr. Sandeep Rana, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Rajiv Sidhu, Assistant Advocate General, Haryana.

...

H. S. Madaan, J. (Oral) Case taken up through video conferencing.

Petitioner Sudhir Kumar, working as Junior Engineer (Civil), in the office of Sub Divisional Office, Haryana Vidyut Parsaran Nigam Limited, Kaithal, Haryana, has filed the instant writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, against Haryana Staff Selection Commissioner, Panchkula, Haryana through its Secretary; Haryana Vidyut Parsaran Nigam Ltd., Panchkula through its Managing Director; State of Haryana through its Additional Chief

CWP No. 11937 of 2020 -2Secretary, Urban Local Bodies Department, Haryana, Chandigarh; Director General, Urban Local Bodies Department, Haryana, Panchkula, Haryana and Mandeep Kumar, Junior Engineer (Civil), through Director General, Urban Local Bodies, Haryana, Panchkula, Haryana, for issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari, to quash the action of Haryana Staff Selection Commission, Panchkula, Haryana - respondent No.1, for not allotting the department of choice to the petitioner, despite the fact that candidates lower in merit to the petitioner have been allotted Urban Local Bodies Department. He also craves for issuance of direction to the respondents to consider his claim for appointment as Junior Engineer (Civil), in the Urban Local Bodies Department, Haryana, as per preference given by him. Notice of motion.

Mr. Rajiv Sidhu, Assistant Advocate General, Haryana, has appeared on behalf of the respondents.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties, besides going through the record.

The petitioner seems to have filed the present writ petition without first submitting a detailed representation to the official respondents, affording them an opportunity to consider his claim and take suitable action in the matter.

Therefore to avoid unnecessary litigation between the parties and to enable the official respondents to consider the claim/grouse of the petitioner and take remedial measures, if so required, the present writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the official respondents

CWP No. 11937 of 2020 -3to take into consideration the claim of the petitioner and then to dispose it of vide a detailed speaking order, giving reasons for arriving at the conclusion. The writ petition alongwith Annexures be treated as representation by the petitioner. The needful be done within two months from today.

( H.S. Madaan ) 17.8.2020 Judge chugh Whether speaking / reasoned Yes / No Whether reportable Yes / No