High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCWP/17563/2020disposed of

Paramjeet Singh And ANR v. State Of Haryana And ORS

2020-10-26Mr. Justice Sant Parkash2 pages

CWP-17563-2020 --1--

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH CWP-17563-2020 Date of Decision: 26.10.2020 PARAMJEET SINGH AND ANR.

....PETITIONERS

VERSUS

STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS ....RESPONDENTS CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANT PARKASH Present : Mr. R.S. Mamli, Advocate, for the petitioner.

Mr. Amit Aggarwal, DAG, Haryana.

**** SANT PARKASH J.(Oral) (The aforesaid presence is being recorded through video conferencing since the proceedings are being conducted in virtual court) The petitioners were appointed as Land Valuation Officer vide appointment letters both dated 03.05.1996 (Annexures P-1 and P-2). On 20.08.2010, the seniority list was issued and the objections were invited and the final seniority list was circulated on 22.08.2010. In the seniority list, petitioner No.1 was placed at serial No.182 in BCA category and petitioner No.2 at serial No.188 in BCA category. The said seniority list is annexed as Annexure P-3.

Respondents No.1 and 2 issued another seniority list and the name of the petitioners have been kept at serial No.100 and 101, which is annexed as Annexure P-4. The petitioners filed objections (Annexure P-5 and P-6) but their claims were rejected vide order dated 23.10.2017 SONIKA 2020.10.26 15:41 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

CWP-17563-2020 --2-- (Annexure P-7). Respondents No.1 and 2 promoted the private respondents despite the fact that they were junior to the petitioners. The petitioners were entitled to the promotion as per the roster point. Notice of motion.

At this stage, Mr. Amit Aggarwal, DAG, Haryana accepts notice on behalf of respondent-State. Copy of the paper book be supplied to learned State counsel, during the course of the day. During the course of hearing, it has emerged that the petitioners have filed the representation dated 27.09.2020 (P-13) stating the claim as raised in the present petition but the concerned authority has not taken any decision thereupon.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he would be satisfied, if direction is issued to the respondents to decide representation (Annexure P-13) moved by the petitioners, in a timebound manner. Having heard learned counsel for the petitioners and after perusing the paper-book, but without commenting on merits of the case, instant petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent-authority, to look into the grievances made in the present writ petition along with representation (P-13) and decide the same by passing a speaking order within a period of five weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.

(SANT PARKASH) October 26, 2020 JUDGE sonika whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No whether reportable:

Yes/No SONIKA 2020.10.26 15:41 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh