High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCWP/16421/2024disposed of

Arvind Kumar And ORS v. State Of Haryana And ORS

2024-07-31Mr. Justice Tribhuvan Dahiya2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH

Sr. No.: 111 Civil Writ Petition No.16421 of 2024 Date of Decision: July 31, 2024 Arvind Kumar & others ..... PETITIONER(S)

VERSUS

State of Haryana & others ..... RESPONDENT(S)

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TRIBHUVAN DAHIYA PRESENT: - Mr. Sunil K. Nehra, Advocate, for the petitioners. Mr. R.S. Budhwar, Additional Advocate General, Haryana.

Tribhuvan Dahiya, J (Oral) The petition has been filed, inter alia, seeking a writ of mandamus directing the respondent-Department to permanently allocate the petitioners districts Rewari, Fatehabad, Sonipat and Rohtak, respectively, all of them being more than sixty per cent disabled. 2.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that grievance raised herein is pending for appropriate decision before second respondent. At this stage, the petitioners will be satisfied in case second respondent is directed to decide their pending representations/legal notices dated 16.03.2024, Annexure P-13 to P-15, in a specified period. 3.

Learned State counsel, appearing on advance notice, submits that the pending representations/legal notices, dated 16.03.2024, shall be decided by the second respondent, expeditiously, after affording opportunity of hearing to the petitioners.

AVIN KUMAR 2024.08.01 15:58 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this judgment/order.

CWP No.16421 of 2024 [2] 4.

In view thereof, without going into merits of the case, the petition is disposed of with a direction to second respondent-Director, Elementary Education, Haryana, to consider and decide the pending representations/legal notices, dated 16.03.2024, Annexure P-13 to P-15, by passing a speaking order in accordance with law and after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners, within a period of six weeks from the date of receiving a certified copy of this order. 5.

In case the order is not passed within the stipulated period, the officer concerned shall pay costs of ` 25,000 to the petitioners. (Tribhuvan Dahiya) Judge July 31, 2024 avin Whether Speaking/ Reasoned:

Yes/ No Whether Reportable:

Yes/ No AVIN KUMAR 2024.08.01 15:58 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this judgment/order.