Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

DINESH KUMAR versus SHRI R.N. PRASHAR & ANR.

High Court of Punjab and Haryana, Chandigarh

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Dinesh Kumar v. Shri R.N. Prashar & Anr. - COCP-1627-2003 [2006] RD-P&H 8684 (16 October 2006)

COCP No.1627 of 2003 -: 1 :-

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

COCP No.1627 of 2003

Date of decision: October 16, 2006.

Dinesh Kumar

...Petitioner(s)

v.

Shri R.N. Prashar & Anr.

...Respondent(s)

Present: Shri Rajnish Gupta, Advocate for the petitioner.

Shri Ravi Dutt Sharma, Dy. Advocate General, Haryana for the respondents.

Surya Kant, J. (Oral)

The petitioner filed CWP No.5128 of 2000, which was disposed of by this Court vide order dated August 13, 2002 with a direction that, "in future if any appointment is to be made, the name of the petitioner will also be considered as per merit".

Alleging non-compliance of the above said order, this contempt petition has been filed.

In response to the show cause notice, both the respondents have filed their respective affidavits.

Respondent No.2 has stated in his affidavit, that no candidate has been appointed by the General Manager, Haryana Roadways, Sirsa where the petitioner was employed as a Junior Programmer on contract basis. It has been further averred that Sarvshri Naresh Kumar and Parveen COCP No.1627 of 2003 -: 2 :-

Kumar were appointed as Junior Programmers more than five years back by the G.M., Haryana Roadways, Faridabad and they having become surplus at Faridabad, were transferred to Sirsa and Kurukshetra depots. It was not a case of fresh recruitment from the open market where the petitioner, as per the directions issued by this court, could be considered on merit.

Learned Counsel for the petitioner states that subsequently some more appointments have also been made.

After hearing Learned Counsel for the parties and having regard to the fact that on the basis of the allegations made in the present petition, no case to proceed with these proceedings is made out, this petition is disposed of with a liberty to the petitioner to initiate appropriate proceedings on the basis of subsequent events, if any, before an appropriate forum, if so advised.

Disposed of.

Rule discharged.

October 16, 2006. [ Surya Kant ]

kadyan 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.