AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
9 paragraphs · 283 wordsJagmohan Bansal, J
On 14.01.2013, the following order was passed:
“The petitioners were initially recruited as Constables in the Executive General Line. Thereafter, they have opted for being approved as Executive Clerks. All the petitioners were absorbed and approved as Executive Clerks between the years 1992 to 1997. In terms of order dated 13.2.1998, the approval granted as Executive Clerks were sought to be withdrawn on the basis that the petitioners had failed to qualify the type test. Accordingly, the petitioners along with similarly situated candidates filed C.W.P. No.2974 of 1998 titled as Sukhdev Singh v. State of Haryana and others,. The afore-mentioned writ petition is pending for adjudication and the impugned order regarding withdrawal of approval on the post of Executive Clerk to Clerical Cadre was stayed. It is contended that on 25.6.2012, petitioner No.1 was given a deemed date of promotion as Head Constable w.e.f. 7.9.1995 and further promoted as ASI and petitioners No.2 to 8 were promoted as Head Constables with special pay.
The challenge in the present writ petition is to the order dated 4.1.2013 (Annexure P.3) whereby the petitioners are being sought to be reverted on the basis that C.W.P. No.2974 of 1998 (Sukhdev Singh and others v. State of Haryana and others) is still pending.
Notice of motion for 22.4.2013.
Operation of the impugned order Annexure P.3 dated 4.1.2013 shall remain stayed in the meanwhile.?”
Learned counsel for the parties are ad idem that petitioners have retired on attaining the age of superannuation and they continued to hold their post in terms of aforesaid interim order.
In the wake of statement of both sides, interim order dated 14.01.2013 is hereby made absolute.
Disposed of.
