Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 0]

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Kumari Divya vs Union Of India on 18 May, 2022

Author: Rajbir Sehrawat

Bench: Rajbir Sehrawat

CWP-14674-2017                                                                        1




102

 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
                CHANDIGARH
                                        -.-

                                 CWP-14674-2017
                                 Date of decision: 18.05.2022


Kumari Divya                                                     ........Petitioner

             Versus

Union of India and others                                       .......Respondents



Coram:       Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajbir Sehrawat
                          -.-


Present:     Mr. S.P.Soi, Advocate
             for the petitioner

             Mr. Shivoy Dhir, Senior Penal Counsel
             for the respondents UOI

                          -.-

Rajbir Sehrawat, J. (Oral)

The present writ petition has been filed under Articles 226/227 of Constitution of India, praying for issuance of writ in the nature of certiorari quashing recommendation of respondent No. 2 qua recruitment to the post of Marker vide result of recruitment declared on 09.01.2016 but examination/3 tests for testing suitability of candidates were conducted on 18.04.2016. Further, prayer has been made for issuance of writ in the nature of mandamus, directing the respondents to recommend the name of the petitioner for the recruitment as she has passed the Stencil cutting test.

1 of 2 ::: Downloaded on - 19-05-2022 19:28:52 ::: CWP-14674-2017 2 The solitary argument raised by counsel for the petitioner is that the process for recruitment for the post of Marker is shown to have been initiated in April 2016, whereas the result was already declared on 09.01.2016. Even the name of the selected candidate was recommended on 02.04.2016.

Record pertaining to the selection in question has been perused. After going through the record, it clearly shows that no result was ever declared on 09.01.2016. Rather, process for the said post was initiated in April 2016 and the result thereof was declared in January 2017. The year mentioned as '2016' is nothing, but a typographic mistake. Even the forwarding letter attached to the result mentioned the date as 09.01.2017. The respondents have also written a letter to the competent authority for correction of the said typographical mistake.

In view of the above, this Court does not find any ground to interfere in the matter. Resultantly, the present writ petition is dismissed being bereft of merit.


                                                      (Rajbir Sehrawat)
                                                               Judge
18.05.2022
Mohan Bimbra
                           Whether speaking/reasoned:        Yes/No
                           Whether reportable        :       Yes/No




                                      2 of 2
                   ::: Downloaded on - 19-05-2022 19:28:53 :::