Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Punjab and Haryana · body

2019 DAILYLAW 4045 (PNJ)

ISHWAR CHANDER AND OTHER v. STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS

CWP/7978/2019 · 2026-07-14

Aman Chaudhary

body2019

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

IN THE PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARH 252 CWP-7978-2019 Date of Decision: 14.07.2026 ISHWAR CHANDER AND OTHERS ... Petitioners VERSUS STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS ... Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMAN CHAUDHARY. **** Present: Mr. Jitender Singh Chahal, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Naveen Kumar, Addl. A.G., Haryana. Mr. Ravinder Malik, Advocate for respondent Nos.5 and 6. **** AMAN CHAUDHARY, J. (ORAL) 1. Learned counsel submits that the petitioners had been promoted to the post of Clerk with a condition that increment and further promotion would be subject to passing typing test, however, the same was not taken, instead they were insisted to clear SETC test, thus reverted which was stayed on 26.03.2019. Similarly circumstanced employees, who were junior to them were also reverted on the same ground, however, the said order has been withdrawn on 27.06.2024 by stating therein that increment for the post of Clerk will be allowed only after qualifying/passing the SETC test Part-I and Part-II. 2. In view of above, the matter needs to be reconsidered and they have no objection in case the above condition is imposed in their case as well, except petitioner No.7, who has been exempted therefrom vide letter dated 20.12.2018, Annexure P-5. RAJENDER KUMAR 2026.07.15 17:24 I am the author of this document CWP-7978-2019 -2- 2. The aforesaid facts having been brought out, during the course of hearing, learned State counsel, on instructions, states that the matter will be re-examined in light of the aforesaid facts especially order dated 27.06.2024 and decision thereon will be taken within a period of six months, uninfluenced by the orders/letters impugned in the present case, which this Court has no reason to believe the authorities would not address in a just, fair and reasonable manner. 3. The aforesaid satisfies the learned counsel for the petitioners. 4. Disposed of accordingly. Needless to say, if the orders are adverse to their interest, the same may be passed after granting opportunity of hearing to them and shall contain reasons, whereupon they shall be free to seek legal redress thereupon. Till then, the interim order shall continue. (AMAN CHAUDHARY) JULY 14, 2026. JUDGE Rajender Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No RAJENDER KUMAR 2026.07.15 17:24 I am the author of this document