← Library
High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCWP/24325/2017disposed of

Krishna Devi v. State Of Haryana And ORS

2017-10-27Mr. Justice A.B. Chaudhari2 pages

CWP No. 24325 of 2017

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH CWP No. 24325 of 2017 Date of decision: 27.10.2017 Krishna Devi ....Petitioner(s)

Versus

State of Haryana and others

...Respondent(s)

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S.SANDHAWALIA

Present:

Mr. Surinder Kumar Daaria, Advocate, for the petitioner.

G.S.SANDHAWALIA, J. (Oral) The petitioner seeks regularization according to the policies dated 18.03.1996 and 01.10.2003 (Annexures P-2 and P-3) alongwith all consequential benefits.

The pleaded case of the petitioner is that she was engaged in the year 1990 as labourer and her services had been dispensed with in the year 2007 and an industrial dispute had been raised and an award dated 29.11.2012 (Annexure P-1) was passed in her favour whereby, she was granted the benefit of reinstatement, continuity of service with 50% back wages. It has been averred that the petitioner has done her duty with honesty and dedication till today and her work and conduct has been found satisfactory. The claim for regularization had been put forward on account of the fact that juniors namely Rohtas, Balwan and Ramavtar, as mentioned in para no. 10, have been regularized. Reliance has been placed upon orders passed by this Court in CWP No. 13039 of 2015, Krishan and others vs. State of Haryana decided on 20.09.2016 (Annexure P-5) and CWP No. 5648 of 2014, Manohar vs. State of Haryana and others, decided on Shivani Gupta 2017.10.31 10:56 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CWP No. 24325 of 2017 23.01.2017 (Annexure P-6). It is submitted that she is also entitled for similar relief.

Counsel submits that a legal notice dated 09.01.2017 (Annexure P-4) has already been served upon the respondents but the same has not been decided. Counsel further submits that he would be satisfied if the said legal notice is decided within a time bound frame. Notice of motion.

Ms. Shruti Jain Goyal, AAG Haryana accepts notice. Copy of the writ petition has been supplied to her.

Keeping in view the above, this Court is of the opinion that no useful purpose would be served to ask the respondents to file reply as the decision making process is still pending.

Accordingly, in view of the above recorded contention and keeping in view the fact that the matter is still pending consideration, the present writ petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent no. 2 to take a decision on the legal notice dated 09.01.2017 (Annexure P-4) within a period of 4 months from the date of receipt of certified copy of the order. In case any adverse order is to be passed, a reasoned order be passed and conveyed to the petitioner.

27.10.2017 (G.S. SANDHAWALIA) shivani JUDGE Whether reasoned/speaking Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No Shivani Gupta 2017.10.31 10:56 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document