Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

MANMOHAN SINGH versus VICE CHANCELLOR, BABA FARID UNIVERSITY O

High Court of Punjab and Haryana, Chandigarh

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Manmohan Singh v. Vice Chancellor, Baba Farid University o - CWP-15389-2006 [2006] RD-P&H 10177 (9 November 2006)

C.W.P NO.15389 OF 2006 1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

* * * * *

C.W.P NO.15389 OF 2006

Date of decision : October 27, 2006

* * * * *

Manmohan Singh ............Petitioner

Vs.

Vice Chancellor, Baba Farid University of ...........Respondents Health Sciences & others

* * * * *

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINEY MITTAL
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.S BHALLA

Present: Mr. R.S Chauhan, Advocate for the petitioner(s).

Mr. T.S Dhindsa, Advocate for the respondents no. 1 & 2.

* * * * *

Viney Mittal, J. (Oral)

The petitioner has approached this Court for issuance of directions to the respondent-Baba Farid University of Health Sciences, Kotkapura Road, Faridkot-respondent no.2 to declare the result of the petitioner of BAMS Second Professional Examination which according to the petitioner has been withheld without any justification by the respondent- University. The petitioner has claimed that he was already eligible and had qualified the re-appear examination in Sanskrit of BAMS First Professional Examination and thus having passed all the subjects of BAMS First Professional Examination, the result of the petitioner for BAMS Second Professional Examination cannot be withheld.

After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the averments made by the petitioner, which have not been disputed on behalf of the respondent-University, we find that the C.W.P NO.15389 OF 2006 2

controversy in the present case stands concluded in favour of the petitioner by a judgement of this Court passed by one of us (Viney Mittal, J.) in `Aseempreet Kundi and another Vs. State of Punjab and others' rendered in CWP No.5843 of 2004 decided on March 8, 2006.

In view of the declaration in Aseempreet Kundi's case (Supra), we find that petitioner had obtained eligibility and qualification to appear in BAMS Second Professional Examination and as such having appeared in the aforesaid examination was entitled to the declaration of his result. In this view of the matter, we allow the present petition and direct respondent no.2 to declare the result of the petitioner of BAMS Second Professional Examination forthwith.

Copy of the order be given dasti on payment of the usual charges.

( VINEY MITTAL )

JUDGE

October 27, 2006 ( H.S BHALLA )

ritu JUDGE


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.