Jagbir Singh v. State Of Haryana And Others

CWP-28456-2023 -1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP-28456-2023 Date of Decision: 16.09.2024 Jagbir Singh

...Petitioner(s)

Versus

State of Haryana and others ...Respondent(s) CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TRIBHUVAN DAHIYA Present:- Mr. Rajender Singh Malik, Advocate for the petitioner Mr. Parveen Mehta, DAG, Haryana *** TRIBHUVAN DAHIYA, J. (Oral) The petition has been filed, inter alia, seeking a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to allow the petitioner to continue on contractual appointment as Assistant till the age of sixty-five years. 2.

Learned State counsel contends that the petitioner was initially appointed on contract basis for a period of six months, which was subsequently extended from time to time. The appointment was in terms of advertisement 12 of 2023, dated 06.12.2023, which prescribed sixty-five years as the maximum age to apply for the retirees; the age limit does not refer to the maximum age for a contractual employee to continue in service. 3.

In this view of the matter, learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner may be permitted to make a fresh representation to the respondents for appointment on contract basis against any other post, considering the fact that he is ex-servicemen, retired from the Indian Army, and PAYAL 2024.09.19 16:29 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment

CWP-28456-2023 -2has rendered service as Assistant on contract basis in the Medical College for over ten years.

4.

Learned State counsel submits that in case any such representation is filed by the petitioner within two weeks, the same shall be considered sympathetically by the fourth respondent/Director, Bhagat Phool Singh Government Medical College for engaging the petitioner against any other post, if vacant, in accordance with law. Appropriate decision in this regard will be conveyed to the petitioner within a period of six weeks of receiving the representation.

5.

In view of the statement made, learned counsel for the petitioner has no objection to the petition being disposed of in terms thereof. 6.

Ordered accordingly.

(TRIBHUVAN DAHIYA) JUDGE 16.09.2024 Payal Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No PAYAL 2024.09.19 16:29 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment