COCP No.1506 of 2009 (O&M) 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH COCP No.1506 of 2009 (O&M) Date of decision: 26.11.2009 Satpal Singh ......Petitioner(s) Versus Raminder Singh ......Respondent(s) CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR GARG * * * Present: Mr. H.S. Saggu, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. S.S. Sahu, Assistant Advocate General, Punjab. Rakesh Kumar Garg, J.(Oral) CM No.21825-CII of 2009 Learned counsel for the applicant-petitioner states that this application may be dismissed with liberty to the petitioner to seek redressal of his grievances with regard to his transfer by making a representation before the appropriate Authority. With the aforesaid liberty, this application is ordered to be dismissed as not pressed. COCP No.1506 of 2009 As per the averments made in this petition, vide order dated 23.4.2009, CWP No.6070 of 2009 was disposed of with a direction to the respondent to take a decision on the representation of the petitioner. The grievance of the petitioner in this petition before this Court is that despite the fact that the aforesaid order was sent to the respondent, no decision has been taken by him in compliance of the aforesaid order. In response to the show cause notice issued by this Court, reply by way of short affidavit of Sh. Raminder Singh, IAS, Labour COCP No.1506 of 2009 (O&M) 2 Commissioner, Punjab, Chandigarh has been filed. The relevant part is reproduced hereinafter below: “That in compliance of the above orders passed by the Hon'ble Court the respondent No.2 i.e Labour Commissioner, Punjab being competent authority took decision on the representation of the petitioner and passed a speaking order dated 7.8.2009 (Annexure R-1 and true translated copy of which is enclosed as Annexure R-1/T), which was conveyed to the petitioner vide endorsement No.Estt.2/2009/20617-19 dated 7.8.2009 and thus the answering respondent has passed the orders within stipulated time of three months as the orders of the Hon'ble High Court were received on 14.5.2009 and the speaking order was passed on 7.8.2009. The claim of the petitioner was partly allowed and charge sheet issued to the petitioner was filed and it was also ordered that the suspension period of the petitioner shall be treated as period spent on duty and he was also held entitled to salary for suspension period and other increments. As regards his promotion to the post of Labour Inspector, Grade-2, he was not found eligible for promotion at present as many employees are senior to him and his case for promotion can be considered when his turn comes as per seniority list. Thus his claim for promotion to the post of Labour Inspector Grade-2, was rejected after giving reasons and passing a speaking order. Thus directions of Hon'ble High Court were complied with in letter and COCP No.1506 of 2009 (O&M) 3 spirit.” In view of the fact that a speaking order dated 7.8.2009 has been passed considering the case of the petitioner, I am not inclined to proceed further in this petition. Rule discharged. November 26, 2009 (RAKESH KUMAR GARG) ps JUDGE