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 37]

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Kuljit Kaur vs State Of Punjab & Others on 29 July, 2009

Author: Ajai Lamba

Bench: Ajai Lamba

 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH



                               Civil Writ Petition No.5488 of 2009
                                      Date of Decision: July 28, 2009


Kuljit Kaur
                                                 .....PETITIONER(S)

                               VERSUS


State of Punjab & Others
                                                .....RESPONDENT(S)

                           .      .     .


CORAM:          HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAI LAMBA


PRESENT: -      Mr. S.K. Arora, Advocate, for the
                petitioner.

                Mr. B.S. Chahal, Deputy Advocate
                General,    Punjab,   for    the
                respondents.



                           .      .     .

AJAI LAMBA, J (Oral)

This civil writ petition has been filed under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to issue appointment letter to the petitioner.

In the petition, it has been pleaded that in response to advertisement dated 21.10.2006 inviting applications for filling the post of Punjabi Lecturer, the petitioner applied. After going through the selection process, the CWP No.5488 of 2009 [2] petitioner was selected. Letter of appointment, however, has not been issued.

                      Learned          counsel          for             the

respondents,            from     the      affidavit           of        Smt.

Harcharanjit            Kaur    Brar,     Director        of       Public

Instructions (SE) Punjab, on behalf of respondent Nos.1 and 2, filed in Court today and taken on record, states that appointment letter has been issued to the petitioner that has been placed on record as Annexure R-1 and is dated 22.6.2009.

Learned counsel for the respondents further states that order of posting shall be given within 15 days from today.

                      Learned        counsel         states             that

consequential           benefits     would     be    given         to    the

petitioner         in     accordance       with     rules,         except

salary for the period for which the petitioner has not worked.

In view of the above, the matter has been rendered as infructuous and is disposed of as such.


                                                        (AJAI LAMBA)
July 29, 2009                                              JUDGE
avin



1. To be referred to the Reporters or not?

2. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?