Pankaj Kumar And ORS v. State Of Haryana And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH CWP No.12948 of 2015 Date of decision: 02.07.2015.

Pankaj Kumar and others ..Petitioners

Versus

State of Haryana and others ..Respondents

CORAM:

HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE DAYA CHAUDHARY

1. Whether reporters of local newspapers may be allowed to see judgment? Yes/No

2. To be referred to reporters or not? Yes/No

3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? Yes/No

Present:

Mr. Narender Hooda, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Jasbir Mor, Advocate for the petitioners.

Daya Chaudhary, J. (Oral) The present writ petition has been filed for issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing of impugned order dated 23.03.2015 (Annexure P-19), whereby, the services of the petitioners have been terminated whereas they were appointed upto end of Academic Session 2015-16.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners were working on their posts for the period from 01.06.2014 till their termination but they were not paid salary for that period. Learned counsel further submits that as per news item, the posts are being filled up on contract basis whereas the petitioners cannot be replaced with other contractual employees. Learned counsel also submits that the petitioners made representations (Annexures P-21 and P-23) to the respondents but no action has been taken thereupon NEETU RANI 2015.07.07 09:52 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

CWP No.12948 of 2015 so far.

Heard arguments of learned senior counsel for the petitioners.

Except the news item nothing is there on record to show that the petitioners are going to be replaced with other contractual employees, which cannot be relied upon and the averments made by learned senior counsel are based only on news item. Without having anything on record, no direction can be issued to the effect that the petitioners not be replaced with other contractual employees. In case, the petitioners come to know that some efforts are being made by the respondents to appoint other contractual employees, they can challenge the same. The petitioners have moved representations (Annexures P-21 and P-23) regarding non-payment of salary for the period from 01.06.2014 till their termination but the same have not been decided so far.

Accordingly, the present writ petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent No.2 to consider the representations (Annexures P-21 and P-23) and to pass necessary order in accordance with law within a period of two months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. In case, the petitioners are found to be entitled for the salary for the period they have actually worked, the same be released to them without any further delay. Disposed of accordingly.

02.07.2015 (DAYA CHAUDHARY) neetu JUDGE NEETU RANI 2015.07.07 09:52 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh