Suman Lata v. State Of Haryana And ORS.




   



 
  

   

!"

#$

"%&'&#()  

* +



  * , 

 

 *




 ) -+ *
 .

* 

    



!"# !

  &



!'"(!)

*

 .

* 

/ 

 +

+



  
-
. "

/  0
-

1*  $

 

 1  $ 

 #    $*  
.
3

 $ 

, 1  

 # 

$* 45
66


.5
66  7

$  

1

%



  

! $



7

 0$0+

*


66


* ,

'

9 

%:$ 1 
665!



    

  

*

 

*#

"

$ $

"

9 

'

 "$ !
634 $ #

5


66.  

   4

!

%  



   

'

 

$ 

* % $1 

 1 $8 , 5 &

%  ! 

 1







 

 
53 " ;  %

  %   1  1*



    #

,  $*! #       .
3 &

#  $

 $ 

$%

66

#   $* 45
66



  

1" ;    1* "< <

  % 0$0+

 *1

! % 

 %

 $   "

*! % 

66&

;  %

1* 

,<

<

0+

%%



=<9+>!'

%1 $)

<

,!)

*

"  6  1* <

0+

% "+

%$

* (

%)

*

'

% ?' 1 $ )

 <

,!

$ *1

%%    

 $

 %

%  $ % 

66  

5

%45
66& <9+%

$ * ; 

   % 0$0+

(

'

 $ 1 *$ 

2

 $

  %+  3 &

  ,

%

7, 1

$

 , )

>1 +

 %
  

      



1

$ 

 %

%  $ *

%%     * $

  45
669  

 

#   6! $ 

 1*  

<

<9+ % 

%%    

$



 

* $

8

* 1

2 - &

* 

,  



!

 56

 %

    $ 

 



   1*  7  +  &  $

2

$

%

*



, 1 % 

* $  *

*1

2

    %
66@5

*!

/


5

% 

$ 

 %

 ,

% %

$$ %

!



 $!1 

3

8  "

 1  1*

3.
- ;



/



 *



 $  %

 1

!  

# 1  

  #

 1 %

$

1 % %$ 

1 ,

" ;   

1$



1 %

$



#1 

1

   9   $



 1$  

 %

$! 

 )

*

+ 

"

' % '$  (

 < * ! ! 1 

%

+

; *!

%

+?B 
-64


%
48

,

    

 &  

 

   % # 

  34
4

</$ #<

!?





'

!



$  



%5

%

 $  

% $

 $ *  

 9 



"

%

* 


-
.  $

$

1*

%


3 4 7

$ %



 % 1*

!

1*

 



 %

 

    %

-



66!

  

%45
66@
.5
66

 ) #

!

1 %

1

# $

;

/,

1 %

1 /  

    %
66 " ,

$  
3..

1; 

 

#



8

*$ $$

 . 7

 $ 

 

4



1 

%

1* 7 +



*1 

 1 $8

,& 1; 



 4

 1* 7 +  7   "

#1   1*

 +  <#  7     1*  )

>1  + %9

&

1$ %



$ 1&



$$ 

  

  $*  45
66B



$  1*



1* $

%



%45
66!

# </$ #<

!1 $)

<

,!   % 
3

     $

$



 6 & $ $ $



#

1 

#

*

1 % 1*

) $!

*$

% ,

1 1* </$ # <

#

1 *

1 % 



 +



 % $ 

 

,



, #

$1* 

$ %

$ #

1%

+ !9

,

-
. 1 

0$

#

1

 

 

 $

, 

 





A  *!

$

% 

#1  

,%

 1

2 1*  '

 *



,   (

#



  $

# 1 $

*

1*



 # 

  % $ !  

  9,  order dated 15.02.2018 bearing Memo No.1325-30 (Annexure P-15) declining the claim of the deceased husband of the petitioner for regularization w.e.f. 01.02.1996 in terms of the regularization policy dated 07.03.1996/18.03.1996 by referring to the Policy of 2014 is hereby set aside. The respondent authorities are directed to pass appropriate orders of regularization afresh with effect from the date when similarly placed persons/employees were regularized under the said policy. Further, the consequential benefits as regards ex gratia financial assistance under the applicable policy shall also be considered by the respondents and the benefits shall be disbursed to the petitioner within a period of 04 months of receipt of certified copy of this order.

4

This Court is also at pains to notice the ministerial manner in which the orders have been passed by the respondent authorities completely ignoring their own documentation, much of which would have been generated from the office of the Executive Engineer, Panipat, itself. Despite the same, the petitioner was made to continuously submit representations for claiming what were her rightful dues and to approach this Court twice for the same benefit. Hence, a cost of Rs.50,000/- is also imposed upon respondent No.4 towards litigation cost as well as cost towards unnecessary harassment to the petitioner. It is made clear that in the event the necessary benefits consequent upon the order of regularization and under the ex gratia financial assistance are not released to the petitioner within a period of 04 months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order as aforesaid, the petitioner would be entitled to interest @ 6% per annum on the said amount from the date of filing of the petition till its realization.  ,"012 13 /



.

* 



1 4 1#1