High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCWP/21835/2018disposed of

Suresh Prasad v. State Of Haryana And ORS

2018-09-07Mr. Justice Rameshwar Singh Malik2 pages

CWP No.21835 OF 2018 --1--

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH CWP No.21835 OF 2018 DECIDED ON: SEPTEBER 07, 2018 SURESH PRASAD .....PETITIONER

VERSUS

STATE OF HARYANA AND ORS.

.....RESPONDENTS CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASPAL SINGH

Present:

Mr. Vipin Yadav, Advocate, for the petitioner.

***** JASPAL SINGH, J.

By virtue of instant petition preferred under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India, petitioner has sought issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to promote the petitioner on the post of Assistant which is due to him w.e.f. 11.10.2013 as his juniors namely Bhagwan and Neelam Prashar have been promoted as Assistant and Stenographer vide order dated 15.07.2010, who have joined in the year 29.03.1996 & 15.03.1995 respectively, whereas petitioner has joined in the year 1992 as Peon and promoted on 13.10.1995 as Clerk. And further to release all the arrears etc. with interest.

The contention of learned counsel for the petitioner is that the case of the petitioner for promotion is already under consideration of the respondents since December 2016 when it was proposed that the petitioner is entitled to the SONIKA 2018.09.21 14:34 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

CWP No.21835 OF 2018 --2-- benefit of promotion sought by him as reflected in letter dated 12.04.2018 (P-8) i.e. an information received under the provision of Right to Information Act. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner feels satisfied in case direction is issued to respondents to consider and finalize the claim with regard to promotion, if no steps has been taken till date. 3.

Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, instant petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent(s) to consider and finalize the claim of the petitioner with regard to promotion by passing a speaking order, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this 1rder.

However, if petitioner still feels aggrieved by any order of the aforesaid authority, he shall be at liberty to have recourse to the remedies available under law as well as to approach this Court. SEPTEBER 07, 2018 (JASPAL SINGH) sonika JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Yes Whether reportable Yes/No SONIKA 2018.09.21 14:34 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh