Akshay Kumar And ORS. v. State Of Haryana And ANR

CWP No.4249 of 2015 (O&M)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH CWP No.4249 of 2015 (O&M) Date of decision: 12.03.2015 Akshay Kumar and others ... Petitioners Vs.

State of Haryana and another ... Respondents

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL 1.

Whether reporters of local newspapers may be allowed to see judgment?

2.

To be referred to reporters or not?

3.

Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? Present:- Mr. R.K.Malik, Senior Advocate with Mr. Tej Pal Dhull, Advocate for the petitioners.

AMIT RAWAL J. (ORAL) Grievance of the petitioners is to seek regularization for the posts of Assistant Information and Public Relations Officers since 2008.

Mr. R.K.Malik, learned Senior counsel assisted by Mr. Tej Pal Dhull, Advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioners submits that the petitioners are eligible for regularization and dehors of the fact that the notification dated 18.06.2014 is under challenge but the fact remains that by raising such a plea, the respondents may not dispense with their services and replace the petitioners with another set of contractual employees and in support of his contention, relied SAVITA DEVI KADIAN 2015.03.18 09:33 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document High Court Chandigarh

CWP No.4249 of 2015 (O&M) upon the judgment of Hon'ble the Supreme Court in Hargurpratap Singh vs. State of Punjab and others 2007(13) SCC 292. He further submits that for seeking regularization, a legal notice dated 11.10.2014 (Annexure P-3) has already been served upon the respondents but no action has been taken thereon. In view of the facts noticed herein above, I deem it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition, with a direction to respondent No.1, to consider the claim of the petitioner as culled out in the legal notice dated 11.10.2014 (Annexure P-3) strictly in accordance with law and in the light of the judgment dated 07.04.2005 (Annexure P-4) rendered in CWP No.9397 of 2004, within a period of four months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of the order.

It is further directed that in case, the petitioners are entitled to such relief, as has been given in the aforementioned judgment, the services of the petitioners shall not be dispensed with and replaced by a set of another contractual employees until and unless the respondents-authorities appoint the regular appointees. With the aforementioned observations, writ petition is disposed of.

(AMIT RAWAL) JUDGE March 12, 2015 savita SAVITA DEVI KADIAN 2015.03.18 09:33 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document High Court Chandigarh