← Library
High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCWP/25643/2017disposed of

Om Parkash And ORS v. State Of Haryana And ORS

2017-12-06Mr. Justice A.B. Chaudhari2 pages

CWP No. 25643 of 2017

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH CWP No. 25643 of 2017 Date of decision: 06.12.2017 Om Parkash and others ....Petitioner(s)

Versus

State of Haryana and others

...Respondent(s)

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

Present:

Mr. Shalender Mohan, Advocate, for the petitioner.

G.S.SANDHAWALIA, J. (Oral) The petitioners, who are 22 in number, seek directions for regularization of their services in view of the policy dated 17.10.2002 (Annexure P-6). It is their case that they were appointed as Class IV employees on various posts i.e. Sweepers, Water Carrier, Mali and petitioners no. 1 to 20 are working with respondent no. 4-Superintendent of Police, Hisar whereas petitioners no. 21 and 22 are working with respondent no. 5-Superintendent of Police, Jind.

The petitioners allege that they are working from the periods ranging from 1989 onwards. It has been averred that similarly situated persons in CWP No. 4928 of 2013, Prahlad and others vs. State of Haryana and another were granted the benefit of regularization on 12.02.2016 (Annexure P-3) and, therefore, the petitioners are also entitled for the same benefit. Reference is also made to the recommendation made by respondent no. 4 on 09/11.10.2013 (Annexure P-5) whereby, approval was sought for regularization of petitioners no. 1 to 20. It is accordingly contended that legal notice dated 18.07.2017 (Annexure P-8) had been served upon Shivani Gupta 2017.12.08 13:06 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CWP No. 25643 of 2017 respondents no. 4 and 5 but no decision has been taken on the same. Counsel further submits that he would be satisfied if the said legal notice is decided within a fixed time frame.

Notice of motion.

Mr. Harish Rathee, Sr. DAG, Haryana accepts notice. Copy of the writ petition has been supplied to him.

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, without commenting on the merits of the case or the entitlement of the petitioners for the abovesaid relief and keeping in view the fact that the matter is still pending consideration, the present writ petition is disposed of with a direction to respondents no. 4 and 5 to take a decision on the legal notice dated 18.07.2017 (Annexure P-8) within a period of 3 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 petitioners.

06.12.2017 (G.S. SANDHAWALIA) shivani JUDGE Whether reasoned/speaking Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No Shivani Gupta 2017.12.08 13:06 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document