SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2018 Supreme(Online)(P&H) 161

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
MUNSHI RAM – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF HARYANA AND ORS – Respondent


IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

207 Date of decision: 07.03.2025 MUNSHI RAM ......Petitioner VERSUS STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS .......Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD S. BHARDWAJ *****

Present: - Mr. R.K. Malik, Senior Advocate with Mr. Kartikey Chaudhary, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Tapan Kumar, DAG, Haryana.

*****

VINOD S. BHARDWAJ, J. (Oral)

Challenge in the present writ petition is to the order dated

12.09.2014 whereby the regularization order issued in favour of the petitioner on 22.07.2014 w.e.f. 01.10.2003 had been withdrawn and revised instructions have been issued to regularize the services of the petitioner w.e.f. 07.07.2014, without affording any opportunity of hearing and without serving any Show Cause Notice.

2. Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner contends that the petitioner was engaged as a Beldar with the respondent-Department in the year 1984 and that he continued to work with the respondents. The Government of Haryana issued a policy of regularization on 01.10.2003 to regularize the services of the Daily Wagers who had completed 03 years of service as on 30.09.2003. The respondent-authorities issued a memo No. 94

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top