Ramdiya v. Haryana Sehri Vikas Pradhikaran And Others




    
 

 

  



  

    !"   "  # $  

%         



 

 

&

#"'

&(") #* 

&

+ '( &(") #* 

  %

&

  ) #*



 

%




 

  ! "#$% 1.

The present writ petition has been filed under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction directing the respondents to consider and create a promotional channel for the petitioner to the next higher post by suitably amending the Service Regulations, 2009 applicable to the Regular Work Charged Field Staff (Group C&D) in the



Civil, Electrical and Horticulture Wing of the Engineering Wing of Haryana Shehri Vikas Pradhikaran (HSVP), as the said Regulations do not provide any promotional avenue to the petitioner, who has been stagnating on the post of Work Supervisor (Electrical) for the last about 22 years; and further directing the respondents to grant promotion to the petitioner in accordance with law, keeping in view the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Dr. M.S. O.Z. Hussain Vs. Union of India as well as the judgment dated 19.12.2025 passed by this Hon'ble Court in CWP No.38075 of 2025 titled Darshna Kumari Vs. HAFED.

2.

Learned counsel for the petitioner, inter alia, contends that stagnation for 22 years without a promotional avenue violates the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court and that the action is discriminatory as promotional avenues exist for Civil and Horticulture Wings but not for the Electrical Wing. The failure to amend the Service Regulations is arbitrary and violates Articles 14 and 16. Further, the issue regarding the opportunity of promotional avenues creates obligation on the employee to provide a fair and reasonable career progression structure and relies upon the judgment rendered by this Court in Darshna Kumari and others vs. The Haryana State Co-operative Supply and Marketing Federation Limited (HAFED) and others, CWP-38075-2025, decided on 19.12.2025.

,

2.1.

At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he would be satisfied if a direction is issued to the respondent No.1 to decide the legal notice dated 06.03.2026 (Annexure P-9) in the light of judgment passed by this Court in Darshna Kumari (supra) (Annexure P-10) by passing a speaking order in a time bound manner. 3.

On advance notice, Mr. S.S. Parmar, Advocate accepts notice on behalf of respondents and submits that he has no objection in case a direction is issued to the respondent No.1/competent authority to hear and decide the legal notice dated 06.03.2026 (Annexure P-9) in the light of judgment passed by this Court in Darshna Kumari (supra) (Annexure P-10) by passing a speaking order in a time bound manner. 4.

In view of the limited prayer made by counsel for the petitioner without commenting upon the merits of the case, the present petition is disposed of and the respondent No.1/competent authority is directed to hear and decide the legal notice dated 06.03.2026 (Annexure P-9) in the light of judgment passed by this Court in Darshna Kumari (supra) (Annexure P-10) by passing a speaking order in a time bound manner, within a period of three months from the date of receiving a certified copy of this order. Further the decision taken thereof shall be conveyed to the petitioner.

5.

Needless to say, if the petitioner is found entitled to the relief sought, the same be granted forthwith by respondent/competent authority. 6.

Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall also stands disposed of.

(HARPREET SINGH BRAR) JUDGE 15.05.2026
 

  

%"-.



 +./   

% 0(



+./