Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

NAMRATA RANI & ORS versus STATE OF HARYANA & ORS

High Court of Punjab and Haryana, Chandigarh

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Namrata Rani & Ors v. State of Haryana & Ors - CWP-596-2000 [2006] RD-P&H 3438 (25 May 2006)

In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana, Chandigarh

C.W.P. No. 596 of 2000

Date of Decision: 4.7.2006

Namrata Rani and others

...Petitioners

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. Deepak Gupta, Advocate,

for the petitioners.

Mr. Hawa Singh Hooda, AG, Haryana, with

Mr. Jaswant Singh, Addl. AG, Haryana and Mr. Harish Rathee, Sr. DAG, Haryana.

JUDGMENT

M.M. KUMAR, J. (Oral)

This order shall dispose of C.W.P. Nos. 596, 816, 975, 1314, 1408, 1355, 1418, 2627, 2980, 2940, 249 & 4488 all of 2000 and 18056 of 1999.

A Division Bench of this Court vide orders dated 29.3.2000, 18.4.2000, 25.4.2000 and 27.4.2000 passed in the aforementioned writ petitions, had directed the respondents to interview the petitioners of the aforementioned writ petitions provisionally for the posts he/she/they had applied by assuming that all the candidates had the requisite qualifications for the post. It was further directed that if they make a grade on merit prepared by the C.W.P. No. 596 of 2000

respondents then appointment letters were to be issued to them subject to further orders that may be passed in these petitions. A stipulation to that effect was required to be inserted in the appointment letters. In pursuance to the directions issued by the Division Bench, the petitioners in both the petitions were interviewed but they could not able to make a grade and accordingly not selected.

This statement has been made by the learned Advocate General on the basis of a chart prepared.

In view of above, these petitions are without merit and accordingly the same are dismissed.

(M.M. KUMAR)

JUDGE

(M.M.S. BEDI)

July 4, 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.