Court : Punjab and Haryana
..... read with article 47 has remained unfulfilled on account of the paucity of doctors to man the hospitals and dispensaries in the rural areas and with a view to provide proper medical services to the rural population and at the same time to encourage the doctors to serve in the rural areas, the government has thought it proper to incorporate the condition of three years rural service as a condition precedent to admission to ..... it becomes clear that an inservice candidate is one who has put in a minimum of two years service in respective fields in the rural areas and is selected against the reserved quota and not all candidates who have put in 2 years.rural service and are selected to postgraduate studies ..... 7 (i) regular pcms employee; and (ii) have completed four years service in very difficult (category d) area or six year service in difficult (category c) or on appropriate combination of both and in case of candidates who have completed 5 year of service as on 01-01-2012, they should have completed 2 years of service in most difficult areas or 3 years of service in difficult areas; and rmo once they are selected in pcms.they will be given benefits of rural service rendered ..... of 2013 & other connected matters 8 will be counted for purpose of computing the stipulated period of three years.d) weightage of 1.0 mark for each year s service in difficult area and 1.5 marks for most difficult area over and above the eligibility of rural service shall be given, subject to a maximum of 5 marks. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
in the high court of punjab & haryana at chandigarh cwp no.23372 of 2012 (o&m) date of decision:27. 11.2012. kusumjit kaur & others --petitioners versus state of punjab & another --respondents coram:- hon'ble mr.justice tejinder singh dhindsa. present:- mr.amrik singh, advocate for the petitioners.*** tejinder singh dhindsa.j petitioner no.1 is presently serving on the post of superintendent grade-ii in the department of cultural affairs.archeology and museum, state of punjab (hereinafter referred to as the respondent department).petitioners no.3 and 4 are currently working on the post of senior assistant in the respondent department and petitioner no.2, who was also working on the post of senior assistant in the respondent department stand retired having superannuated in the year 2011. the instant writ petition has been filed impugning the order dated 27.6.2012 (annexure p-15).whereby the claim of the petitioners seeking ante dated promotion and seniority in the cadre of assistant/senior assistant with effect from the date of passing of the assistant grade-ii examination in the years 1986 and 1988 has been rejected. learned counsel for the petitioners has been heard at length. a perusal of the impugned order would reveal that the same is a well reasoned speaking order and a view has been taken that question of seniority/promotion cannot be reopened after the lapse of a considerable length of time. even the hon'ble apex court in case of p.s.cwp no.23372 of 2012 (o&m) -2- .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
..... reliance was also placed on the judgment rendered by a full bench of the madras high court in dr. r. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
in the high court of punjab & haryana at chandigarh civil writ petition no.20354 of 2013 date of decision: september 16, 2013 jai bhagwan petitioner versus state of haryana and others respondents civil writ petition no.20381 of 2013 rohtas petitioner versus state of haryana and others respondents civil writ petition no.20387 of 2013 dalbir petitioner versus state of haryana and others respondents civil writ petition no.20439 of 2013 chander petitioner versus state of haryana and others respondents coram : hon'ble mr.justice surya kant. hon'ble mr.justice surinder gupta. present : mr.arvind kumar chauhan, advocate, for the petitioner. 1. whether reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?. 2. to be referred to the reporters or not?. 3. whether the judgment should be reported in the digest?. surya kant, j. (oral) this order shall dispose of cwp nos.20354, 20381, 20387 & 20439 of 2013 as common questions of law and facts are involved in these cases. for brevity, the facts are being extracted from cwp no.20354 of 2013. kumar mohinder 2013.10.10 12:47 i attest to the accuracy of this order chandigarh cwp no.20354 of 2013 & connected matters [2].notice of motion to contesting respondents only. on our asking mr.s.s.patter, learned senior deputy advocate general, haryana, accepts notice on their behalf. let three copies of each of the writ petition be supplied to the learned state counsel during the cours.of day failing which this order shall be automatically .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
crwp no.1400 of 2013 (o&m) -1- in the high court of punjab & haryana at chandigarh crwp no.1400 of 2013 (o&m) date of decision : 08.01.2014 jagira @ jagir singh .....petitioner versus state of haryana and others ...respondents coram: hon'ble mr.justice r.p.nagrath present: ms.sarla chaudhary, advocate for the petitioner. mr.manish deswal, dag, haryana r.p.nagrath, j. (oral) in the rejoinder to the reply filed by the state, the petitioner averred that in crwp no.92 of 2013 alongwith connected petitions, this court has set aside the amendments of 2012, made in haryana good conduct prisoners (temporary release) act, 1988. the order dated 05.08.2013 passed by this court in crwp no.92 of 2013 would show that the matter was decided in view of the order passed in cwp no.11832 of 2012, titled gurmeet singh versus state of haryana. this court in cwp no.11832 of 2012 and connected petitions, noted the submission made by the state counsel that state was proposing for carrying out the amendments and for issuance of ordinance in this behalf. it was directed that needful be done within 1 months. the petitions were thus disposed of with liberty to the petitioners to assail the ordinance/act, which was now to be brought jitender kumar 2014.01.09 16:47 i attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document chandigarh crwp no.1400 of 2013 (o&m) -2- in, in case they were still aggrieved. learned counsel for the petitioner has referred to the haryana good conduct prisoners (temporary release) .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
in the high court of punjab and haryana at chandigarh crm-m-42656-2013 date of decision: 28.01.2014 virkaran awasty & others .....petitioners versus state of haryana & another .....respondents coram: hon'ble mr.justice surinder gupta present : mr.t.s.sangha, sr.advocate with mr.arun gosain, advocate for the petitioners.***** surinder gupta, j.(oral) the petitioners seek quashing of criminal complaint no.278/11 dated 4.8.2011 titled as 'gfi versus anup sharma and others', pending in the court of chief judicial magistrate, sonepat. the petitioners are the directors of m/s bush foods overseas pvt.ltd.the food inspector visited their premises at bahalgarh, sonepat and took sample of rice, which was sent to the public analyst. the report was received from the public analyst declaring the sample as adulterated and unfit for human consumption as it contained 1.8% of extraneous matter and 8.1% of damaged grains by weight against maximum prescribed limit of 1.0% and 5.0%. learned counsel for the petitioners has argued that the food inspector had not followed the procedure for taking the sample. after taking the sample on 26.02.2011, it was sent on 28.2.2011 and reached the public analyst on 1.3.2011. the report was received by respondent no.2 on 1.8.2011 and the prosecution of the petitioner was initiated. he has further argued that after filing of the complaint summons for service of respondent satyawan 2014.01.31 11:29 "i attested to the accuracy and integrity of this document" high .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
..... it is, thus, his say that there should be only one model of development across the state and this court should intervene to ensure that the allocation of funds by the state for development of different areas of the state should chand parkash 2014.02.10 15:48 i attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document cwp-2471-2014 -2- be equal, failing which it amounts to discrimination and, thus, violative of article 14 of the constitution of india. ..... how development takes place in a state, which area has to be given priority, which project has to be handled in which manner and on priority or otherwise and how funds allocation takes place are all matters within the executive domain. ..... the pace of development in the rohtak area is more and seeks to highlight how certain projects have been cleared quickly while the project in question has been pending for alleged lack of finances. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
in the high court of punjab & haryana at chandigarh civil writ petition no.19120 of 2013 (o&m) date of decision: 24.03.2014 dinesh chadha ..petitioner versus union of india and others ..respondents coram: hon'ble mr.justice sanjay kishan kaul, chief justice. hon'ble mr.justice arun palli present : mr.vikas arora, advocate, for the petitioner. mr.brijeshwar singh kanwar, central govt. standing counsel with ms.kamla malik, standing counsel for uoi/respondents no.1 and 2. ms.nivedita sharma, advocate with mr.harpal singh sirohi, advocate, for respondent no.3. mr.harsimran s.sethi, addl. advocate general, punjab, for respondent no.4. mr.ajay gupta, addl. advocate general, haryana, for respondent no.5. mr.shekhar verma, standing counsel for ut chandigarh/ respondent no.6. **** sanjay kishan kaul c.j.(oral) cm no.3660 of 2014 leave is granted to place on record replication to the written statement of respondents no.1 to 3 and exemption is granted from filing certified copies of the annexures and the application is allowed. civil writ petition no.19120 of 2013 (o&m) learned counsel for the petitioner seeks to withdraw the petition. learned counsel for respondent no.3 presses for costs. sharma ravinder 2014.03.25 10:30 i attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document civil writ petition no.19120 of 2013 (o&m) [2].we are of the view that it has been more a case of over enthusiasm of a young advocate who is petitioner in the present petition. it should dawn on the people that it .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
cwp-19721-2011 1 in the high court of punjab and haryana at chandigarh 208 cwp-19721-2011 date of decision: 7.4.2014 municipal corporation, bhatinda ......petitioner versus appellate auth. under payment of gratuity act &ors.......respondents coram: hon'ble mrs.justice sabina present: mr.v.k.sandhir , advocate, for the petitioner. mr.piyush bansal, dag, punjab mr.raj kaushik, advocate, for respondent no.3. **** sabina, j. this petition has been filed by the petitioner under articles 226/227 of the constitution of india challenging the order dated 16.2.2011 (annexure p-3) passed by respondent no.2, whereby, petitioner was directed to pay additional gratuity to respondent no.3 and order dated 5.9.2011 (annexure p-6) passed by respondent no.1, whereby appeal filed by the petitioner challenging order dated 16.2.2011 was dismissed. learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that respondent no.3 had joined municipal council bathinda on 5.9.1960 devi anita and superannuated from the post of superintendent on 31.1.1990. 2014.04.11 13:22 i am approving this document chandigarh cwp-19721-2011 2 after retirement, respondent no.3 was paid ` 1,74,125/- towards gratuity as admissible under punjab municipal corporation employees pension and general provident fund rules 1994 (for short 'the rules').after 11 years.respondent no.3 moved an application under payment of gratuity act, 1972 ('the act' for short).vide the impugned order dated 16.2.2011, the said application was allowed by .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
in the high court of punjab & haryana at chandigarh civil writ petition no.7828 of 2006 date of decision: 24.04.2014 joint directors and others ..petitioners versus madan mohan singh kanwar and another ..respondents coram: hon'ble mr.justice sanjay kishan kaul, chief justice. hon'ble mr.justice arun palli present : mr.rajiv sharma, advocate, for the petitioners.none for the respondents. **** sanjay kishan kaul c.j.(oral) the matter in issue pertains to the reimbursement of medical expenses to respondent no.1 a government employee. the impugned judgment of the central administrative tribunal, chandigarh bench dated 11.11.2005 is common to nine cases, but the present petition is only qua 9th case of madan mohan singh kanwar who had filed o.a.no.1110-pb of 2004. on our query, learned counsel for the petitioner states that he has no instructions as to whether the impugned judgment was assailed even qua other applicants before the tribunal or not. in so far as the facts of the present case are concerned, they have been penned down in para no.10 of the impugned order setting out that respondent no.1 before us was a central government retiree and in 2003 under a proper sanction he underwent heart surgery in escorts hospital at delhi. an expenditure of ` 271731/- was incurred but only part reimbursement of ` 1,92,815/- was given withholding balance amount of sharma ravinder 2014.04.24 18:56 i attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document civil writ petition no.7828 of 2006 .....
Tag this Judgment!