Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Punjab and Haryana · body

2025 DAILYLAW 40775 (PNJ)

RAKESH KUMAR AND OTHERS v. DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM LIMITED AND OTHERS

CWP/9131/2025 · 2025-04-01

Jagmohan Bansal

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 129 CWP-9131-2025 Date of decision: 01.04.2025 RAKESH KUMAR AND OTHERS ….PETITIONERS Vs. DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM LIMITED AND OTHERS ...RESPONDENTS CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAGMOHAN BANSAL Present: Mr. R.K. Malik, Senior Advocate with Mr. Samrat Malik, Advocate for the petitioners. Ms. Rajni Gupta, Addl. A.G., Haryana. **** JAGMOHAN BANSAL, J (ORAL) 1. The petitioners through instant petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India are seeking setting aside of order dated 28.11.2024 (Annexure P-15) whereby their claim for promotion as Junior Engineer from the date their juniors have been promoted has been rejected. 2. Mr. R.K. Malik, Senior Advocate submits that case of petitioners is squarely covered by order dated 02.08.2016 passed by this Court in CWP- 3403 of 2015 (Annexure P-16). The official respondents preferred LPA-205 of 2017 before this Court which came to be dismissed vide order dated 09.08.2017. The official respondents further preferred petition before Supreme Court which also came to be dismissed vide order dated 02.02.2018. 3. Ms. Rajni Gupta, Addl. A.G., Haryana submits that the respondents published tentative seniority list, however, petitioners did not file objection(s) to the same. MANOJ KUMAR 2025.04.02 10:11 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-9131-2025 -2- 4. On being confronted with aforesaid orders, she expressed her inability to controvert applicability of aforesaid orders to the instant case. She further submits that Competent Authority would reconsider claim of petitioners as per afore-cited orders. 5. In the wake of statement of learned State Counsel, petition stands disposed of. 6. Let the needful be done within 3 months from today. 7. It is hereby made clear that if the arrears arise, the respondents would not be liable to pay interest if the payment is made within two months from the date of determination of arrears. In case of delay beyond said period, interest @ 9% per annum would be payable. 01.04.2025 [JAGMOHAN BANSAL] manoj JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No MANOJ KUMAR 2025.04.02 10:11 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document