Suraj Mal vs State of Haryana and others

Augustine George Masih, J.—The contention of the petitioner in this writ petition is that initially the petitioner was working as a Lecturer in the School Cadre. On his appointment on regular post as a Lecturer in the College Cadre on 20.12.2001, his pay was not correctly fixed as he was not granted the two advance increments which he was entitled to. Although that was subsequently rectified but his pay, which was also earlier protected, was not granted to him leading to now a situation where he is deprived of one increment of Rs. 175/- which he was entitled to at the time of fixation of his pay on his appointment as a Lecturer in the College Cadre. He contends that claiming the said benefits, the petitioner has moved a representation dated 30.07.2011 (Annexure P-5) to the respondents and when no response was received, the petitioner was forced to serve a legal notice dated 21.10.2011 (Annexure P-6) but till date, no decision thereon has been taken by the respondents.

Counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner, at this stage, would be satisfied if a direction is issued to the Commissioner, Higher Education, Haryana-respondent No. 2 to consider the legal notice served by the petitioner on the respondents and take a decision thereon within some specified time.

Without going into the merits of the case or commenting thereon, the present petition is disposed of with directions to the Commissioner, Higher Education, Haryana-respondent No. 2 to consider and decide the legal notice dated 21.10.2011 (Annexure P-6) within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. The decision, so taken, be conveyed to the petitioner forthwith. In case, the petitioner is held entitled to the claim, as made through his legal notice, the same shall be released to the petitioner within a further period of three months thereafter.