High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCWP/21776/2016disposed of

Amar Singh v. State Of Punjab & ORS

2016-10-20Mr. Justice Inderjit Singh2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH CWP No.21776 of 2016 Date of decision: 20.10.2016 Amar Singh ..Petitioner

Versus

The State of Punjab and others ..Respondents

CORAM:

HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE DAYA CHAUDHARY

Present:

Mr. H.P.S. Aulakh, Advocate for the petitioner.

*** Daya Chaudhary, J. (Oral) The grievance of the petitioner in the present writ petition is that he has not been regularized in spite of having more than 27 years of service. Earlier the services of the petitioner were terminated but he was reinstated with continuity in service vide award dated 25.05.1992 passed by Labour Court at Gurdaspur.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the case of the petitioner is covered under the policy of regularization framed by the State Government (Annexure P-1 and P-2). Learned counsel also submits that the petitioner has served a legal notice through his counsel and has also made a representation dated 07.04.2016 (Annexure P-5) but no action has been taken so far. The petitioner would be satisfied in case, directions are issued by this Court to respondent No.1 to consider the representation (Annexure P-5) in view of policy of regularization (Annexures P-1 and P-2). Keeping in view the limited prayer of the petitioner and Neetu Rani 2016.10.24 13:04 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

CWP No.21776 of 2016 without commenting anything on the merits of the case, the present writ petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent No.1 to consider the case of the petitioner in view of instructions dated 23.01.2001 and 17.11.2011 (Annexures P-1 and P-2) and pass necessary order in accordance with law within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.

In case, the petitioner is found to be entitled for regularization and other consequential benefits, the same be released to him within a period of two months thereafter.

In case, the petitioner is still aggrieved in any manner, he is at liberty to avail the appropriate remedy.

20.10.2016 (DAYA CHAUDHARY) neetu JUDGE √ Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No √ Whether Reportable Yes/No Neetu Rani 2016.10.24 13:04 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh