IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH.
R.S.A. No.2934 of 2005
Date of Decision: 28.5.2009
Jaspal Singh.
....... Appellant through Shri
Vikram Singh,Advocate.
Versus
State of Haryana and another.
....... Respondent no.1 through
None.
Respondent no.2 through
Shri Sanjiv Gupta, Advocate.
CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MAHESH GROVER
....
1. Whether Reporters of Local Newspapers may be allowed to
see the judgment?
2. To be referred to the Reporters or not?
3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?
....
Mahesh Grover,J.
This Regular Second Appeal is directed against judgments and
decrees dated 21.8.2003 and 19.4.2005 passed respectively by the Civil
Judge (Junior Division), Karnal and the District Judge, Karnal vide which
the suit and the appeal of the plaintiff-appellant were dismissed.
The appellant had filed a suit for declaration to the effect that
order dated 7.8.2000 passed by the Secretary, the Balu Cooperative Credit
& Service Society Ltd., Balu terminating his service is illegal with
consequential relief of restoration of all service benefits to him along with
arrears of pay and interest at the rate of 18% per annum.
The suit was contested by the defendant/respondent-society and
R.S.A.No.2934 of 2005
-2-
….
the order of termination of service was sought to be justified.
The parties went to trial on as many as seven issues and after
appraisal of the evidence, both the Courts below dismissed the suit and the
appeal of the appellant.
Today, at the hearing, learned counsel for the respondent no.2,
on instructions from Shri Sohan Lal, Clerk of the Sahapur Pacs Ltd. in
which the Balu Cooperative Credit & Service Society Ltd., Balu has
merged, stated that the matter has been resolved between the parties and as a
measure of settlement, the appellant shall be taken back in service as a fresh
appointee and that he will not be entitled to any back wages etc.
Learned counsel for the appellant has stated that the appellant
is also present in Court today and he states that he accepts the statement of
the learned counsel for respondent no.1 and that the appeal may be disposed
of accordingly.
The statements of Shri Sohan Lal, Clerk of the Sahapur Pacs
Ltd. and the appellant have also been recorded separately.
After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and in view of
the statements made by Shri Sohan Lal and the appellant, I am of the
opinion that it would not be proper to enter upon the merits of the case and
the appeal deserves to be disposed of accordingly.
Resultantly, the appeal is disposed of with a direction that the
appellant shall be reinstated in service of respondent no.2, which stands
merged with Sahapur Pacs Ltd., as a fresh appointee and he shall have no
monetary claim or any other claim against the respondents.
R.S.A.No.2934 of 2005
-3-
….
The impugned judgments and decrees are modified in the
aforementioned terms.
May 28,2009 ( Mahesh Grover ) "SCM" Judge