CWP NO. 8495 OF 2010 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. CWP NO. 8495 OF 2010 DECIDED ON- 19.01.2011 Shri Bhagwan ……PETITIONER Versus State of Haryana and others ……RESPONDENTS Coram HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MAHESH GROVER Present: Mr.Ranjit Saini, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr.Sunil Nehra, Sr. DAG, Haryana Mr. Narender Kumar Sharma, Advocate for respondent no.5. MAHESH GROVER, J(Oral) The only grievance that the respondents have raised regarding the extension of the petitioner in terms of instructions dated 2.5.2008 (Annexure P1) is that the case of the petitioner was submitted belatedly. He was required to submit the case much prior to the retirement but the same was submitted only two days prior to the retirement. It is thus, case of the respondents that the petitioner's case for continuance in service though covered by Annexure P1, cannot be acceded. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and perusing the material on record, I am of the opinion that the stand of the respondents is unjustified. The instructions which have been issued by the respondents- State is a reflection of the measures expected of a welfare State. Having done so, such a beneficial provisions should not be defeated by putting any constrictive or restrictive interpretation thereon so as to defeat the right of a person claiming benefit of such provisions. The decision of the State while enforcing such instructions in the cases of CWP NO. 8495 OF 2010 2 physically handicapped persons should also not be laid a hostage to technicalities. The respondents are, thus, directed to consider the case of the petitioner in the light of what has been observed herein and decide the case of the petitioner forthwith within a period of three weeks' from today. The writ petition stands disposed of. 19.01.2011 ( MAHESH GROVER) mamta JUDGE