High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCWP/26138/2017disposed of

Ved Parkash Sharma v. State Of Haryana And ORS.

2017-11-16Mr. Justice Rajan Gupta2 pages

CWP No. 26138 of 2017 --1--

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH CWP No. 26138 of 2017 DECIDED ON: NOVEMBER 16, 2017 VED PARKASH SHARMA .....PETITIONER

VERSUS

STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS .....RESPONDENTS CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASPAL SINGH

Present:

Mr. Sandeep Panwar, Advocate for the petitioner.

***** JASPAL SINGH, J (ORAL) 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 release the arrears of salary which is difference of pay drawn and actually entitled from 28.11.1981 to 31.08.2007, the period he actually worked on the post of SDE in view of order dated 24.03.2017 (P-6) passed in RA-CW-146-2014 in CWP No. 15794 of 2013 on 24.03.2017 in case titled as "Ram Kishan Mittal and others v. State of Haryana. 2.

At the very outset, it has been submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that he feels satisfied in case a direction is issued to the respondents to consider and decide the legal notice dated 19.07.2017 (P-8), within a stipulated period, in view of judgment passed by this Court in CWP No.15794 of 2013, decided on 20.01.2014 as well as order dated 24.03.2017 (P-6) passed in RA-CW-146-2014 in CWP No. 15794 of 2013 on 24.03.2017 in case titled as Sonika 2017.11.17 17:37 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

CWP No. 26138 of 2017 --2-- "Ram Kishan Mittal and others v. State of Haryana". 3.

Accordingly, instant petition is disposed of with a direction to respondents to look into the grievances unfolded by the petitioner in his legal notice (P-8) and to decide the same in view of afore-said judgment as well as order rendered by this Court, that too, by passing a speaking order, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. 4.

However, if the petitioner still feels aggrieved of the order passed by the concerned authority, he shall be at liberty to approach this Court. NOVEMBER 16, 2017 (JASPAL SINGH) sonika JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Yes Whether reportable Yes/No Sonika 2017.11.17 17:37 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh