Dinesh Kumar Vs. State of Haryana and Others - Court Judgment

SooperKanoon Citationsooperkanoon.com/1141879
CourtPunjab and Haryana High Court
Decided OnMay-28-2014
AppellantDinesh Kumar
RespondentState of Haryana and Others
Excerpt:
civil writ petition no.10852 of 2014 {1} in the high court of punjab and haryana at chandigarh date of decision: may 28, 2014 dinesh kumar ...petitioner versus state of haryana & others ...respondents coram: hon'ble mr.justice augustine george masih present: mr.anish batra, advocate, for the petitioner. ***** augustine george masih, j.(oral) petitioner has approached this court with a prayer for grant of the same benefit, i.e., promotion to the post of high school headmaster with effect from the date his juniors.namely, sushma rani and sangeeta sharma-respondent nos.4 and 5 respectively have been promoted vide order dated 10.02.2014 (annexure p-3).it is asserted that the petitioner, who is senior to respondent nos.4 and 5 in the feeding cadre, has been denied the promotion to the post of high school headmaster despite his case having been sent through proper channel by the district education officer, jind on 14.02.2014. no reason has been assigned for not considering the claim of the petitioner for promotion. the only reason which can be taken is that the petitioner was promoted to the post of lecturer but he was never confirmed on the said post and, therefore, his claim would be covered in his favour by the judgment passed by this court in cwp no.14905 of 2009, surinder kumar kumar ramesh 2014.05.29 09:42 i attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document high court chandigarh civil writ petition no.10852 of 2014 {2} and others versus state of haryana and others.decided on 27.03.2012. even under the statutory rules governing the service, petitioner is entitled to the benefit as has been claimed by him. petitioner submitted a representation dated 07.05.2014 (annexure p-4) to the respondents, but till date no decision thereon has been taken or conveyed to the petitioner. counsel contends that the petitioner, at this stage, would be satisfied if a direction is issued to the director, secondary education, haryana-respondent no.2 to consider and decide the representation dated 07.05.2014 (annexure p-4) filed by the petitioner, within some specified time. in view of the statement made by the counsel for the petitioner and without going into the merit of the case or commenting thereon, the present writ petition is disposed of with directions to the director, secondary education, haryana-respondent no.2 to consider and decide the representation dated 07.05.2014 (annexure p-4) within a period of four months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. in case the claim of the petitioner is accepted, the consequential benefits, if any, be released to him, in accordance with law, within a further period of one month. in case the claim of the petitioner is not to be accepted, then a well reasoned and speaking order be passed and conveyed to the petitioner forthwith. may 28, 2014 ( augustine george masih ) ramesh judge kumar ramesh 2014.05.29 09:42 i attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document high court chandigarh
Judgment:

Civil Writ Petition No.10852 of 2014 {1} IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision: May 28, 2014 Dinesh Kumar ...Petitioner Versus State of Haryana & others ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH Present: Mr.Anish Batra, Advocate, for the petitioner.

***** AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH, J.(ORAL) Petitioner has approached this Court with a prayer for grant of the same benefit, i.e., promotion to the post of High School Headmaster with effect from the date his juniORS.namely, Sushma Rani and Sangeeta Sharma-respondent Nos.4 and 5 respectively have been promoted vide order dated 10.02.2014 (Annexure P-3).It is asserted that the petitioner, who is senior to respondent Nos.4 and 5 in the feeding cadre, has been denied the promotion to the post of High School Headmaster despite his case having been sent through proper channel by the District Education Officer, Jind on 14.02.2014.

No reason has been assigned for not considering the claim of the petitioner for promotion.

The only reason which can be taken is that the petitioner was promoted to the post of Lecturer but he was never confirmed on the said post and, therefore, his claim would be covered in his favour by the judgment passed by this Court in CWP No.14905 of 2009, Surinder Kumar Kumar Ramesh 2014.05.29 09:42 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh Civil Writ Petition No.10852 of 2014 {2} and others Versus State of Haryana and otheRs.decided on 27.03.2012.

Even under the statutory rules governing the service, petitioner is entitled to the benefit as has been claimed by him.

Petitioner submitted a representation dated 07.05.2014 (Annexure P-4) to the respondents, but till date no decision thereon has been taken or conveyed to the petitioner.

Counsel contends that the petitioner, at this stage, would be satisfied if a direction is issued to the Director, Secondary Education, Haryana-respondent No.2 to consider and decide the representation dated 07.05.2014 (Annexure P-4) filed by the petitioner, within some specified time.

In view of the statement made by the counsel for the petitioner and without going into the merit of the case or commenting thereon, the present writ petition is disposed of with directions to the Director, Secondary Education, Haryana-respondent No.2 to consider and decide the representation dated 07.05.2014 (Annexure P-4) within a period of four months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.

In case the claim of the petitioner is accepted, the consequential benefits, if any, be released to him, in accordance with law, within a further period of one month.

In case the claim of the petitioner is not to be accepted, then a well reasoned and speaking order be passed and conveyed to the petitioner forthwith.

May 28, 2014 ( AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH ) ramesh JUDGE Kumar Ramesh 2014.05.29 09:42 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh