Present : Mr. V.K.Sandhir Advocate Vs. State Punjab Department of Education and Others - Court Judgment

SooperKanoon Citationsooperkanoon.com/1153355
CourtPunjab and Haryana High Court
Decided OnJun-30-2014
AppellantPresent : Mr. V.K.Sandhir Advocate
RespondentState Punjab Department of Education and Others
Excerpt:
in the high court of punjab and haryana at chandigarh civil writ petition no.12222 of 2014 date of decision: 30.6.2014 dharam singh .....petitioner versus state punjab department of education and others .....respondents coram : hon'ble mr.justice rameshwar singh malik present : mr.v.k.sandhir, advocate for the petitioner. **** rameshwar singh malik j. (oral) feeling aggrieved against the alleged inaction on the part of respondent authorities, the petitioner has approached this court, by way of instant writ petition under article 226/227 of the constitution of india, seeking a writ in the nature of mandamus. learned counsel for the petitioner, at the very outset, fairly states that petitioner has not approached the respondent authorities by way of an appropriate representation or legal notice before filing instant writ petition. he further submits that given an opportunity, petitioner shall approach the respondent authorities within a period of three weeks from today and the competent authority i.e.branch manager, state bank of india, ajnala branch-respondent no.4 may be directed to consider and decide his representation, within a reasonable time. kumar amit 2014.06.30 16:57 i attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document civil writ petition no.12222 of 2014 2 having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, including the issue of limitation, if any, the branch manager, state bank of india, ajnala branch-respondent no.4 is directed that if the petitioner approaches him within a period of three weeks from today by way of an appropriate representation or legal notice, he shall consider and decide the same at an early date by passing an appropriate order thereon, in accordance with law, but in any case within a period of three months from the date of receipt of representation from the petitioner. it is further directed that, while considering the grievance of the petitioner, the branch manager, state bank of india, ajnala branch-respondent no.4 shall also keep in mind the order dated 23.4.2012 passed by this court in cwp no.15649 of 2008 (jagjit kaur versus state of punjab and others).with the observations made above, the present petition stands disposed of. (rameshwar singh malik) judge306.2014 ak sharma kumar amit 2014.06.30 16:57 i attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document kumar amit 2014.06.30 16:57 i attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
Judgment:

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No.12222 of 2014 Date of Decision: 30.6.2014 Dharam Singh .....Petitioner versus State Punjab Department of Education and others .....Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE Mr.JUSTICE RAMESHWAR SINGH MALIK Present : Mr.V.K.Sandhir, Advocate for the petitioner.

**** RAMESHWAR SINGH MALIK J.

(ORAL) Feeling aggrieved against the alleged inaction on the part of respondent authorities, the petitioner has approached this Court, by way of instant writ petition under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India, seeking a writ in the nature of Mandamus.

Learned counsel for the petitioner, at the very outset, fairly states that petitioner has not approached the respondent authorities by way of an appropriate representation or legal notice before filing instant writ petition.

He further submits that given an opportunity, petitioner shall approach the respondent authorities within a period of three weeks from today and the competent authority i.e.Branch Manager, State Bank of India, Ajnala Branch-respondent No.4 may be directed to consider and decide his representation, within a reasonable time.

Kumar Amit 2014.06.30 16:57 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Civil Writ Petition No.12222 of 2014 2 Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, including the issue of limitation, if any, the Branch Manager, State Bank of India, Ajnala Branch-respondent No.4 is directed that if the petitioner approaches him within a period of three weeks from today by way of an appropriate representation or legal notice, he shall consider and decide the same at an early date by passing an appropriate order thereon, in accordance with law, but in any case within a period of three months from the date of receipt of representation from the petitioner.

It is further directed that, while considering the grievance of the petitioner, the Branch Manager, State Bank of India, Ajnala Branch-respondent No.4 shall also keep in mind the order dated 23.4.2012 passed by this Court in CWP No.15649 of 2008 (Jagjit Kaur versus State of Punjab and others).With the observations made above, the present petition stands disposed of.

(RAMESHWAR SINGH MALIK) JUDGE306.2014 Ak Sharma Kumar Amit 2014.06.30 16:57 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Kumar Amit 2014.06.30 16:57 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document