Gurmeet Singh v. State Of Punjab And ORS

CWP No. 20182 of 2021

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH CWP No. 20182 of 2021 DATE OF DECISION :- October 12, 2021 Gurmeet Singh

...Petitioner

Versus

The State of Punjab and others

...Respondents

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.S. MADAAN Present:- Mr. Vishal Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Arun Kaundal, DAG, Punjab.

*** Petitioner Gurmeet Singh, aged about 30 years son of Sh. Parminder Singh, resident of VPO Lande, Tehsil Baghapurana, District Moga has filed the instant civil writ petition against official respondents The State of Punjab through its Secretary, Department of Co-operation, Govt.

of Punjab, The Registrar Cooperative Societies Punjab, The Joint Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Ferozepur Division, Ferozepur, The Deputy Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Moga, Assistant Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Baghapurana, District Moga, The Lande Multipurpose Agricultural Co-operative Society Limited, Lande, Tehsil Baghapurana, District Moga through it President, Inspector Co-operative Societies, office of Assistant Registrar Co-operative Societies Baghapurana, District Moga and some private respondents craving for issuance of writ in the nature of mandamus directing the official respondents to appoint him as Salesman for the reason that he has secured highest marks to the tune of 71% in qualifying degree of Graduation amongst all the 7 candidates who were called and interviewed by the Selection PARVINDER SINGH 2021.10.

CWP No. 20182 of 2021 Committee, however, by way of manipulation a candidate having lower merit was selected whereas the petitioner was ignored. According to the petitioner, he had submitted written representation dated 30.7.2021 (Annexure P-5) to the respondents but that has not evoked any response, therefore, he has filed the present writ petition. At the very outset, learned counsel for the petitioner states that petitioner would be satisfied if a direction is issued to the official respondents especially respondent No. 2 to consider and dispose of the representation within a time bound manner. I find merit in his request. Keeping in view the nature of the dispute between the parties as well as prayer made by the petitioner, for the purpose of enabling respondent No.

2 to consider the claim of petitioner and then to take appropriate action, if need be and further to avoid unnecessary litigation, the writ petition is disposed of directing respondent No. 2 to consider the representation of the petitioner in accordance with law, rules, regulations and instructions on the subject within a period of two months from the date of receipt of copy of the order and if some action in the matter is warranted then the needful be done in accordance with law. A speaking order in that regard be passed, which be conveyed to the petitioner as per Registered A.D. Post. The petitioner may be granted personal hearing in the matter, if so desired by him. If the petitioner feels dissatisfied after passing of the order then he may approach the Court again in accordance with law.

(H.S. MADAAN) JUDGE October 12, 2021 p.singh Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No PARVINDER SINGH 2021.10.12 15:44 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document