- (1.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioner in person and learned counsel for the opposite party.
(2.) The present petition has been filed with the prayer for quashing the order dated 27.12.2012 and for extending the benefit of the letter dated 05.03.2012 issued by the Department of Public Enterprises.
(3.) The aforementioned relief has been claimed by the petitioner solely on the ground that some letter was written by the Executive Director (HR) dated 20.12.2011 and drawing the attention of the Court towards the noting made in pursuance to the said letter, it has been submitted that the said decision of the Department of Public Enterprises has wrongly not been accepted and, in case, the same had been accepted, the petitioner would have been entitled for the relief as claimed by him. To cut short the issue in question, we find that the argument has been advanced on behalf of the petitioner that one person, namely, Sri Praveen Khullar, who has been appointed along with the petitioner on deputation, has been extended similar benefits whereas the petitioner has been denied the same, though he is entitled for promotional pay scale on the next higher post.;