← Library
High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCWP/15111/2015dismissed

Anju v. State Of Haryana & ANR

2015-07-27Mr. Justice Inderjit Singh2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH CWP No.15111 of 2015 Date of decision: 27.07.2015.

Anju ..Petitioner

Versus

State of Haryana and another ..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. Vikas Lochab, Advocate for the petitioner.

Daya Chaudhary, J. (Oral) The grievance of the petitioner in the present writ petition is that she was working as Library Attendant on contractual basis since 2012 and was not allowed to join her duties subsequently on 31.03.2015.

Earlier, the petitioner filed CWP No.25498 of 2014, which was disposed of with a direction to the respondents to decide the representation moved by the petitioner.

In compliance of direction issued in CWP No.25498 of 2014, the representation moved by the petitioner was rejected by respondent No.1 vide order dated 31.03.2015 wherein it has been NEETU RANI 2015.07.29 09:57 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

CWP No.15111 of 2015 mentioned that the petitioner has herself left the job whereas as per stand of the petitioner, she was not allowed to join her duties. Whether the petitioner has left the job at her own or she was not allowed to join her duties is a disputed question of fact, which cannot be decided by this Court.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has also brought to the notice of this Court that subsequently, a person was appointed in place of the petitioner but after filing of earlier petition, that person was also relieved.

There is nothing on record to show as to whether any person has been appointed on contractual basis in place of the petitioner or not.

Hence, no interference is required when neither any person has been appointed on contractual basis nor it has been proved by placing on record any document that the petitioner has left the job at her own or she was not allowed to join her duties. Dismissed.

However, the petitioner may avail the remedy before Civil Court, if so desired.

27.07.2015 (DAYA CHAUDHARY) neetu JUDGE NEETU RANI 2015.07.29 09:57 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh