Gobind Lal Chaudhary v. State Of Haryana And ORS..

CWP No. 27257 of 2017 --1--

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH CWP No. 27257 of 2017 DECIDED ON: NOVEMBER 30, 2017 GOBIND LAL CHAUDHARY .....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 Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India, petitioner has sought the issuance of writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to release arrears of salary which is difference of pay drawn and actually entitled to the petitioner for the period on which he has actually worked on the post of Sub Divisional Engineer in view of the order dated March 24, 2017 (Annexure P-6) passed in RA-CW-146 of 2014 in CWP No. 15794 of 2013, titled as "Ram Kishan Mittal and others vs. State of Haryana".

2.

At the very outset, it has been submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner feels satisfied in case a direction is issued to the respondents to consider and decide the legal notice dated 22.08.2017 (P-7), within a stipulated period, in view of the judgments passed by this Court in Sonika 2017.12.01 13:05 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

CWP No. 27257 of 2017 --2-- CWP No.15794 of 2013, titled as "Ram Kishan Mittal and others vs. State of Haryana & others; as well as order dated March 24, 2017 passed in RA-CW146 of 2014 in CWP No. 15794 of 2013. 3.

Accordingly, instant petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent No.2-Engineer-in Chief, Department of PWD (B&R), Haryana, Chandigarh to look into the grievances unfolded by the petitioner in his legal notice (P-7) and to decide the same in view of afore-said judgment (P-4) rendered by this Court as well as order dated March 24, 2017 passed in RACW146 of 2014 (P-5), 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 30, 2017 (JASPAL SINGH) sonika JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Yes Whether reportable Yes/No Sonika 2017.12.01 13:05 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh