Please Log in / Register to access the full text of this judgment and the entire database
(2021) Law Today Live Doc. Id. 16297 = 2021(2) L.A.R. 632
Decided on: 05.07.2021
Present:
Mr. Naveen Kaushik, Advocate for the petitioners.
(The proceedings are being conducted through video conferencing, as per instructions.)
Constitution of India, Article 226 – Service matter -- Minimum regular pay scale – Right of -- Representation filed by the petitioners for grant of said benefit, being the employees of the Government Medical College since they are working from various dates starting from the year 2012 on contract basis – Keeping in view the fact that since the decision making is still incomplete, petition disposed of with the directions to respondent No.2 to take a decision on the representation within a period of 3 months keeping in view the referred judgments.
(Para 1-6)
Cases referred:
2. Satish Kumar and others vs. State of Haryana and others, CWP No.27199 of 2015 decided on 17.05.2018.
***
G.S. SANDHAWALIA, J. (ORAL) –
1. The petitioners in the present writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seek directions for issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to grant them the minimum regular pay scale meant for the posts, in view of the judgment of the Apex Court passed in Civil Appeal No.213 of 2013 'State of Punjab and others Vs. Jagjit Singh and others' decided on 26.10.2016 = (2016) Law Today Live Doc. Id. 10973 = 2016 (3) L.A.R. 315 (Annexure P-1). Reliance is also placed upon the judgment of this Court passed in CWP No.27199 of 2015 'Satish Kumar and others vs. State of Haryana and others' decided on 17.05.2018 (Annexure P-2).
2. Counsel submits that a representation dated 22.11.2019 (Annexure P-3) has been filed by the petitioners with the respondent No.3 for grant of said benefit, being the employees of the Government Medical College, Nalhar, since they are working from various dates starting from the year 2012 on contract basis. Counsel further submits that he would be satisfied if the representation dated 22.11.2019 (Annexure P-3) is decided in a time bound manner.
3. Notice of motion.
4. Ms. Kirti Singh, AAG, Haryana accepts notice on behalf of the respondents.
5. Keeping in view the fact that since the decision making is still incomplete, no useful purpose will be served to call upon the respondents for filing reply, as it would cause inordinate delay in deciding the proceedings.
6. Accordingly, without commenting upon the merits of the case, the present petition is disposed of with the directions to respondent No.2 to take a decision on the representation dated 22.11.2019 (Annexure P-3) within a period of 3 months from the receipt of the certified copy of this order, keeping in view the above said judgments.
7. Disposed of.
Order accordingly.
********