Mahabir Singh and Others Vs State of Haryana and Another

High Court Of Punjab And Haryana At Chandigarh 3 Apr 2012 CWP No. 22391 of 2011
Bench: Single Bench

Judgement Snapshot

Case Number

CWP No. 22391 of 2011

Hon'ble Bench

Augustine George Masih, J

Advocates

R.K. Malik and Mr. Ravinder Malik Puri, for the Appellant; Sunil Nehra, D.A.G., Haryana, for the Respondent

Judgement Text

Translate:

Augustine George Masih

1. The prayer made in this petition is for grant of technical pay scale of Rs. 1200-2040 to the petitioners w.e.f. 01.05.1990 which has been revised

from time to time. It has been asserted by the petitioners that they are working on technical posts which would entitle them to the benefits as has

been claimed by them in the present writ petition. The claim of the petitioners is covered by the judgment of this Court passed in Civil Writ Petition

No. 18754 of 1991 ''Gurdev Singh and others V. State of Haryana and Others'' decided on 18.01.2010. The petitioners have already filed a

representation to the respondents claiming the said benefits which is dated 16.09.2011 (Annexure P-7) but no decision thereon has been taken.

2. It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the petitioners at this stage would be satisfied if a direction is issued to the

Engineer-in-Chief, Irrigation Department, Haryana (respondent No.2) to consider and decide the representation of the petitioners within some

specified time.

3. The prayer made by the learned counsel for the petitioners is not opposed by the learned State Counsel. In view of the above, without

commenting upon the merits of the case, the present petition is disposed of with a direction to the Engineer-in-Chief, Irrigation Department,

Haryana (respondent No.2) to consider the representation of the petitioners dated 16.09.2011 (Annexure P-7) and take a decision thereon within

a period of two months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. The decision so taken be conveyed to the petitioners forthwith. In

case, the claim of the petitioners as made through their representation dated 16.09.2011 (Annexure P-7) is accepted, the consequential benefits in

accordance with law be released to the petitioners, if entitled to, within a period of two months thereafter.

From The Blog
Supreme Court to Rule on Multi-State Societies in IBC Cases
Oct
25
2025

Story

Supreme Court to Rule on Multi-State Societies in IBC Cases
Read More
Supreme Court: Minors Can Void Property Sales by Guardians
Oct
25
2025

Story

Supreme Court: Minors Can Void Property Sales by Guardians
Read More