SATPAL Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER has approached this Court praying for issuance of a writ of mandamus directing respondents to consider the claim of the petitioner for regularization of his services as the juniors to the petitioner have already been regularized.

(2.) COUNSEL for the petitioner contends that the petitioner has submitted a representation dated 10.04.2014 (Annexure P -6), according to which, names of two of the persons, who are junior to the petitioner, have been specifically pointed out in para -3 whose services have been regularized while ignoring the claim of the petitioner. Petitioner was initially appointed on D.C. rates in year 1978 and since then, he has been working in Sadhaura range on daily wage basis without any break in service.

(3.) IN the light of the submissions made by the counsel for the petitioner and without going into the merits of the case or commenting thereon, the present petition is disposed of with directions to the Principal Chief Conservator of Forest, Haryana -respondent No. 2 and Divisional Forest Officer, Yamuna Nagar, District Yamuna Nagar -respondent No. 3 to consider and decide the representation dated 10.04.2014 (Annexure P -6) submitted by the petitioner within a period of five months' from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.