IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP-24550-2025 (O&M)

Date of decision: 25.08.2025 Sandeep Kumar ... Petitioner Vs.

Dakshin Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam and others ... Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARPREET SINGH BRAR Present: Mr. Amit Rao, Advocate for Mr. Anurag Goyal, Advocate for the petitioner.

*******

HARPREET SINGH BRAR, J. (ORAL)

1. Present civil writ petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari seeking quashing of the order dated 18.04.2023 (Annexure P-11), vide which promotion of the petitioner to the post of Executive Engineer has been deferred on the pretext of pending disciplinary/judicial proceedings and further to issue a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to promote him to the aforesaid post w.e.f. 18.04.2023, the date from which his juniors were promoted along with all the consequential benefits.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the controversy involved in the present case is squarely covered by the judgment rendered by the Coordinate Bench of this Court in Balraj Singh Rangi Vs. Haryana Power Generation Corporation Ltd. and another, CWP-4516-2021, decided on 14.02.2024. As such, the petitioner is entitled to the same relief.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that at this stage, the petitioner would be satisfied if the representation dated 24.11.2023 (Annexure P-15) submitted by him is decided by respondent No.2 by passing a speaking order, after affording an opportunity of hearing, in a time bound manner.

4. Notice of motion.

5. At this Stage, Mr. Prince Singh, Advocate appears on behalf of the respondents. He could not controvert the fact that case of the petitioner is squarely covered by the judgment passed the Division Bench of this Court in Balraj Singh Rangi’s case (supra). He submits that claim of the petitioner would be considered in terms of the aforesaid judgment and has no objection, in case a direction is issued to respondent No.2 to consider and decide the

passing a speaking order.

6. In view of the limited prayer made by learned counsel for the

petitioner, present petition is disposed of and respondent No.2 is directed to

terms of the judgment passed by this Court in Balraj Singh Rangi’s case (supra) and pass a speaking order, after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.

7. Further, the decision taken on the representation dated

24.11.2023 (Annexure P-15) shall be conveyed to the petitioner.

8. Needless to say, if the petitioner is found entitled to the relief sought, the same be granted to him forthwith by the competent authority.

[ HARPREET SINGH BRAR ]

25.08.2025 JUDGE vishnu