Karam Chand v. State Of Haryana And ORS.

CWP-6775-2018

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH CWP-6775-2018 Date of Decision: March 19, 2018 Karam Chand

...Petitioner

Versus

State of Haryana and others

...Respondents

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN PALLI

Present:

Mr. S.K. Malik, Advocate, for the petitioner.

ARUN PALLI, J. (ORAL) The petitioner was appointed as a Class-IV employee, on part time basis, on 30.04.1990. His services were regularised pursuant to an order, dated 08.08.2014 (Annexure P-3), w.e.f. the date of the order. The limited grievance that he has is, that one Shish Pal, who was appointed subsequent to the petitioner on 01.01.1991, his services have since been regularised, pursuant to an order, dated 18.10.2011 (Annexure P-5), w.e.f. 01.03.1999. Thus, it is urged that services of the petitioner too ought to have been regularised from the same date. The petitioner purports to have repeatedly represented to the respondents in this regard, but to no avail. Even the legal notice, dated 16.01.2018 (Annexure P-4), the respondents have been served with, has failed to evoke any response. Prashant Kapoor 2018.03.21 10:06 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document

CWP-6775-2018 That being so, the petition is disposed of at this stage with a direction to the respondents to consider to consider the claim/grievance of the petitioner as also the legal notice, dated 16.01.2018 (Annexure P-4). And, pass appropriate orders, in accordance with law, within a period of three months from the receipt of a certified copy of this order. However, in the event the claim of the petitioner is declined, the respondent authorities shall pass a comprehensive order assigning reasons in support thereof. (ARUN PALLI) JUDGE March 19, 2018 Pkapoor Whether Speaking/Reasoned:

YES / NO Whether Reportable:

YES / NO Prashant Kapoor 2018.03.21 10:06 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document