Civil Revision No. 4599 of 2011 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Revision No. 4599 of 2011 Date of Decision: 01.08.2011 *** Gulab Devi Hospital & Anr. .. Petitioners Vs. Mrs. Jagdeep Kaur & Ors. .. Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARVIND KUMAR Present:- Mr. Ramesh Kumar, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. APS Guliani, Advocate for respondent No.1-caveator. *** ARVIND KUMAR, J. Both the Courts below have granted the relief of ad-interim injunction in favour of the plaintiff-respondent No.1 and have restrained the petitioner-defendants not to terminate her service forcibly, illegally and unlawfully, except in due course of law, till the disposal of the case. Heard. The plaintiff claimed that the defendants-her employer are going to terminate her services without resorting to the due procedure since she is their permanent and confirmed employee. However, the stand of the defendants-petitioners is that the document/ letter on the basis of which the plaintiff is claiming that she has been confirmed, is a procured documents which the plaintiff managed to get in connivance with their official and that her services are already terminated. A perusal of both the orders reveal that the averments of both the parties have to be adjudicated upon, on the basis of evidence led by both the parties and prima facie the plaintiff was shown to be an employee of the defendants. Admittedly, prior to alleged dispensation of her service, no enquiry has been conducted and it cannot be concluded at this juncture as to whether there was necessity of the same or not? It all depends upon the Civil Revision No. 4599 of 2011 2 evidence to be led by the parties. In this view of the matter, to avoid any irreparable loss to the plaintiff, balance of convenience lies as well in her favour, interim directions have been rightly issued by the Courts below. There is no illegality or perversity in the impugned order. The revision petition, being without merit, is accordingly dismissed. However, the learned trial Court is directed to dispose of the pending suit preferably within six months. (ARVIND KUMAR) JUDGE August 01, 2011 Jiten