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 1, Cited by 0]

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Madan Lal And Another vs State Of Punjab And Others on 4 January, 2011

Author: Surya Kant

Bench: Surya Kant

  IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT
                 CHANDIGARH


                         Civil Writ Petition No.75 of 2011
                         Date of Decision : January 04, 2011.


Madan Lal and another                              .....Petitioners
      versus
State of Punjab and others                         .....Respondents


CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT.


Present : Mr.R.K.Arora, Advocate, for the petitioners.
                      -.-

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?
                            ---

Surya Kant, J. (Oral)

The petitioners, who are Ex-servicemen, applied for the post of Clerks advertised by the District & Sessions Judge, Jalandhar, vide advertisement dated 13.5.2009 (Annexure P-1). It is averred that the petitioners qualified the written test held on 9.8.2009 and thereafter, were called for Computer Proficiency Test held on 20.11.2010. It is their case that without notifying the result of the Computer Proficiency Test, that the selections have been made and the posts reserved for Ex-servicemen category have been filled up by appointing the candidates belonging to General Category.

In the writ petition and/or during the course of hearing, the petitioners have nowhere stated that they qualified the Computer C.W.P.No.75 of 2011 2 Proficiency Test also. There case appears to be that they are not aware of their performance as the result of the Computer Proficiency Test was not declared. In these circumstances, the writ petition is dismissed as pre- mature with liberty to the petitioners to seek information under the Right to Information Act, 2005, regarding their performance and result of the Computer Proficiency Test held on 20.11.2010 and/or their overall position in the merit list. If they apply for such an information, respondent No.2 is directed to supply the same to them as per the Rules, within a period of two weeks from the date of receiving the application. The petitioners shall, thereafter, be at liberty to approach an appropriate forum, if so advised.

Dasti.

January 04, 2011                                     (SURYA KANT)
  Mohinder                                              JUDGE