Varinder Singh v. State Of Haryana And Another

CWP No.20028 of 2019 (O&M) -1IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP No.20028 of 2019 (O&M) Date of Decision.23.07.2019 Varinder Singh

...Petitioner

Vs State of Haryana and another ..Respondents CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL

Present:

Mr. Prem Chand Chaudhary, Advocate for the petitioner.

-.- AMIT RAWAL J. (ORAL) Prayer in the present case is to decide representations dated 30.05.2018 (Annexure P-10), 30.01.2019 (Annexure P-11) and legal notice 27.05.2019 (Annexure P-12) submitted by petitioner for promotion to post of District Food and Supplies Controller. In 2000, petitioner joined as Assistant Food and Supplies Officer in respondent Department and on 12.07.2012, further promoted to post of District Food and Supplies Officer. On 28.06.2013, transferred from Jind to Kurukshetra whereas junior person namely Ashok Kumar was promoted as District Food & Supplies Officer w.e.f. 15.04.2013. Case of petitioner for promotion to the post of District Food and Supplies Controller was not considered, owing to pendency of charge sheet whereas Ashok Kumar was promoted as District Food and Supplies Controller on 27.09.

2017 subject to condition that exoneration of their seniors from charges or end of currency of punishment, would entail into reversion to the post of Superintendent/DFSO. Mr. Chaudhary has drawn attention of his Court to order PANKAJ KUMAR 2019.07.

CWP No.20028 of 2019 (O&M) -2dated 16.03.2018 whereby order dated 18.01.2018 passed by Enquiry Officer has been withdrawn. Petitioner in this regard has submitted representations dated 30.05.2018 (Annexure P-10), 30.01.2019 (Annexure P-11) and legal noice dated 27.05.2019 (Annexure P-12) but no action has been taken so far.

Without going into merits and demerits of the matter, I deem it appropriate to direct respondents to consider representations Annexures P-10 and P-11 & P-12 submitted by petitioner within a period of two months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order and pass a speaking order thereon after affording opportunity of personal hearing, if required, failing which respondents shall be liable to pay costs of `25000/- to the petitioner. This condition of imposing costs is only to prevent petitioner to run from pillar to post and avail remedy of contempt in case of non-compliance of directions issued by this Court.

The writ petition stands disposed of with the above direction.

(AMIT RAWAL) JUDGE July 23, 2019 Pankaj* Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No PANKAJ KUMAR 2019.07.29 12:17 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document