CWP No. 17956 of 2021

1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH

CWP No. 17956 of 2021

DATE OF DECISION :- September 10, 2021

Sandeep Kumar

...Petitioner

Versus

State of Haryana and another

...Respondents

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.S. MADAAN

Present:-

Mr. Mahavir Singh, Advocate for the petitioner.

Ms. Shubhra Singh, Additional Advocate General, Haryana.

***

The case has been taken up through Video Conferencing.

Petitioner Sandeep Kumar has filed the instant writ petition

craving for issuance of a direction to the respondents State of Haryana and

Secretary, Haryana Staff Selection Commission, Panchkula, Haryana to

issue the appointment letter for the post of Assistant Line Man after

awarding 5 marks on account of Socio Economic Crieteria. According to

the petitioner, he had got served a legal notice upon respondents dated

8.5.2021 (Annexure P-9) and earlier to that had submitted representation

dated 12.4.2021 (Annexure P-8) but those had not evoked any response,

therefore, he has been compelled to file the present writ petition. At the very

outset, learned counsel for the petitioner states that petitioner would be

satisfied if a direction be issued to the respondents to consider his

representation dated 12.4.2021 (Annexure P-8) and legal notice dated

8.5.2021 (Annexure P-9) and then to take the necessary action in the matter.

PARVINDER SINGH

2021.09.10 12:27

I attest to the accuracy and

integrity of this document

CWP No. 17956 of 2021

2

In view of the facts and circumstances of the case, in order to

enable the respondents to consider the claim of the petitioner and to avoid

unnecessary litigation, I find that it would be proper and appropriate if such

prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioner be accepted. Accordingly,

the writ petition is disposed of directing respondent No. 2 to consider the

representation and legal notice got served by the petitioner detailed above as

per law in light of rules, regulations and guidelines on the subject within a

period of two months from the date of receipt of copy of the order in his office and

if some action in the matter is warranted then the needful be done in accordance

with law. Respondent No. 2 is required to pass a speaking order in that regard,

copy of which be then sent to the petitioner.

(H.S. MADAAN)

JUDGE

September 10, 2021

p.singh

Whether speaking/reasoned

Yes/No

Whether Reportable

Yes/No

PARVINDER SINGH

2021.09.10 12:27

I attest to the accuracy and

integrity of this document