Rinku And Others vs State Of Punjab And Others

G.S. Sandhawalia , J

The petitioners in the present writ petition filed under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India, seek quashing of the order dated 15.12.2011

(Annexure P-2), whereby 381 Safai Sewaks were to be regularized by the Municipal Corporation, Bathinda.

It is the grouse of the petitioners that only 243 persons have been regularized leaving out around 127. It is submitted that similarly situated persons had

approached this Court in CWP No.1413 of 2021 'Banti and others Vs. State of Punjab and others', in which directions were issued on 22.01.2021

(Annexure P-6) to decide the representation dated 16.11.2020 (Annexure P-5) within a period of 3 months by passing a speaking order. The said

order reads as under:-

“Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are entitled for the regularization of their services w.e.f. 2011 and not

from 2016. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners argues that the similarly situated employees have been granted the benefit of regularization

w.e.f. 2011 and, therefore, the petitioners are also entitled for the grant of the said benefit. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners further

submits that for the relief, which is being claimed in the present writ petition, the petitioners have already submitted a representation dated 16.11.2020

(Annexure P/5) to the respondent No.3/Commissioner, Municipal Corporation, Bathinda, which is still pending consideration with the respondent No.3

and the petitioners will be satisfied, at this stage, in case, a time bound direction is issued to the respondent No.3 to decide the said representation.

In view of the above, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case or the claim being made by the petitioners, respondent No.3 is directed

to decide the representation dated 16.11.2020 (Annexure P/5) submitted by the petitioners by passing a speaking order within a period of three months

from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

Present writ petition stands disposed of.â€​

Counsel points out that similar representation dated 16.11.2020 (Annexure P-5) has also been filed by the petitioners with respondent No.2.

Notice of motion.

Ms. Simran Grewal, AAG, Punjab accepts notice on behalf of respondents/State.

Keeping in view the above, the present writ petition is disposed off in the same terms as in the case of Banti and others (supra).