Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

MADHUSUDAN versus STATE OF HARYANA & ORS

High Court of Punjab and Haryana, Chandigarh

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Madhusudan v. State of Haryana & Ors - CWP-17611-2006 [2006] RD-P&H 10243 (9 November 2006)

In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana, Chandigarh

C.W.P. No. 17611 of 2006

Date of Decision: 9.11.2006

Lali Kumari

...Petitioner

Versus

State of Haryana and others

...Respondents

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M. KUMAR
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M.S. BEDI

PRESENT: Mr. L.R. Nandal, Advocate,

for the petitioner.

JUDGMENT

M.M. KUMAR, J. (Oral)

This petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution prays for quashing order dated 16.2.2004 (P-1) qua respondent No. 4, namely, Shri Dinesh Kumar, Hindi Teacher, who is stated to be junior to the petitioner. It has been asserted that he has been promoted illegally by ignoring the petitioner. The petitioner has also sought quashing of communication dated 10.10.2006 (P-8), whereby it has been intimated that correspondent in relation to clarification C.W.P. No. 17611 of 2006

regarding equivalency of the degree of M.A. (Hindi) examination from the Karnataka State Open Universty, Mysore as per book of Kurukshetra Universty, Kurukshetra, is going on and after receipt of the same, the case of the petitioner shall be considered. A further prayer has also been made for directing the respondents to promote the petitione from the date her junior has been promoted.

As has been noticed above, for the relief claimed in the instant petition, the petitioner has already sent a legal notice, dated 29.6.2006 (P-7) to the respondents, which is pending consideration.

Without going into the merits of the case, we deem it just and appropriate to direct the respondents to take cognizance of the legal notice, dated 27.4.2006 (P-3) sent by the petitioners and decide the same expeditiously preferably within a period of four months from the date a certified copy of this order is presented to them. If the claim of the petitioners is found to be meritorious and decided in their favour then the benefit accruing to them shall be disbursed within a further period of three months thereafter. It shall be appreciated if a speaking order is passed.

Petition stands disposed of in the above terms.

(M.M. KUMAR)

JUDGE

(M.M.S. BEDI)

November 9, 2006

JUDGE

Pkapoor


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.