Punjab-Haryana High Court
Pardeep Singh & Anr vs Punjab Mandi Board & Anr on 26 March, 2012
Author: Surya Kant
Bench: Surya Kant
HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
****
CWP No.5519 of 2012 (O&M)
Date of Decision: 26.03.2012
****
Pardeep Singh & Anr. . . . . Petitioners
vs.
Punjab Mandi Board & Anr. . . . . Respondents
****
CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT
****
1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?
2. To be referred to the Reporters or not?
3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?
****
Present: Mr. Sameer Sachdeva, Advocate for the petitioners
****
SURYA KANT, J. (ORAL)
(1). The petitioners claim themselves to be more meritorious as compared to other candidates for appointment to the post of Clerks under the Scheduled Caste category. The petitioners allege that they were not called for the subsequent counseling only on the plea that the petitioners were absent in the first counseling.
(2). The petitioners in this regard are said to have submitted representation dated 19.03.2012 (Annexure P7) also. (3). Having heard learned counsel for the petitioners and considering the nature of relief sought by them, however, if the petitioners have rendered any reasonable explanation for their alleged absence in the first counseling, I am of the considered view that their claim requires sympathetic consideration by the respondents.
(4). The writ petition is accordingly disposed of at this stage, without expressing any views on merits, with a direction to the respondents to consider the above-mentioned claim of the petitioners and take an appropriate decision within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order.
(5). Till then, two of the said posts shall be kept vacant.
(6). Ordered accordingly. Dasti.
CWP No.5519 of 2012.doc -2-
26.03.2012 (SURYA KANT)
vishal shonkar
Judge