Skip to content


Present: Mr. Umesh Narang Advocate Vs. State of Haryana and Others - Court Judgment

SooperKanoon Citation

Court

Punjab and Haryana High Court

Decided On

Appellant

Present: Mr. Umesh Narang Advocate

Respondent

State of Haryana and Others

Excerpt:


.....increments was sought to be withdrawn, were quashed. the present writ petition has been filed praying for the issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus for directing the respondents to restore the pay of the petitioners which was reduced and refixed at lower stages. counsel would submit that even a legal notice dated 5.11.2012 (annexure p-6) already stand served. in the light of the facts noticed hereinabove, i deem it appropriate to dispose of the present writ petition with the direction to respondent no.2 i.e.the commissioner and director general, school education, state of haryana, to consider the grievance and claim of the petitioner and to take a final decision on the legal notice dated 5.11.2012 (annexure p-6) strictly in accordance with law within a period of 4 months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. the present writ petition is disposed of. february 11, 2013 (tejinder singh dhindsa) diwaker gulati judge

Judgment:


IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP No.24529 of 2012 Date of Decision:11th February, 2013 Bhoop Singh and others .....Petitioners versus State of Haryana & others ....Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE Mr.JUSTICE TEJINDER SINGH DHINDSA.

Present: Mr.Umesh Narang, Advocate for the petitioneRs.***** Tejinder Singh Dhindsa, J.

(Oral) The petitioners are working on regular basis on the post of JBT/C&V teacher/Head Teacher in the Haryana State Education Department.

In the light of instructions dated 25.07.2011 the benefit of bunching increments that already stood granted to the petitioner was withdrawn on the basis that the proviso to Rule 7 of the Revised Pay Rules, 2008, would not be applicable.

Some of the employees who were identically situated to the petitioners challenged such action in terms of filing Civil Writ Petition No.3027 of 2011 before this Court and vide judgment dated 14.09.2011 the order of reduction of pay was set aside and liberty had been granted to the respondent-State to proceed further only after issuing of a show cause notice.

Counsel would even refer to judgment dated 03.11.2012 passed by this Court in Civil Writ Petition No.18438 of 2010 titled as Subhash Chander and others versus State of Haryana CWP No.24529 of 2012 -2- and others as also other connected petitions (Annexure P-5) whereby the instructions dated 14.06.2010, in the light of which the benefit of bunching increments was sought to be withdrawn, were quashed.

The present writ petition has been filed praying for the issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus for directing the respondents to restore the pay of the petitioners which was reduced and refixed at lower stages.

Counsel would submit that even a legal notice dated 5.11.2012 (Annexure P-6) already stand served.

In the light of the facts noticed hereinabove, I deem it appropriate to dispose of the present writ petition with the direction to respondent No.2 i.e.the Commissioner and Director General, School Education, State of Haryana, to consider the grievance and claim of the petitioner and to take a final decision on the legal notice dated 5.11.2012 (Annexure P-6) strictly in accordance with law within a period of 4 months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.

The present writ petition is disposed of.

February 11, 2013 (TEJINDER SINGH DHINDSA) Diwaker Gulati JUDGE


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organize Client Files //