Punjab-Haryana High Court
Vikas And Others vs State Of Haryana And Others on 31 July, 2014
Bench: Ajay Kumar Mittal, Jaspal Singh
LPA No. 1099 of 2014 [1]
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
LPA No. 1099 of 2014 (O&M)
Decided on : 31.07.2014
Vikas and others
. . . Appellants
Versus
State of Haryana and others
. . . Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASPAL SINGH
PRESENT: Mr. P.S. Jammu, Advocate,
Mr. Raj Mohan Singh, Advocate and
Mr. Kamal Rathi, Advocate for
Mr. Ravi Sharma, Advocate for the appellant(s).
Ms. Tanisha Peshawaria, DAG, Haryana.
Mr. D.S. Rawat, Advocate
for respondent No. 2.
****
AJAY KUMAR MITTAL, J. (Oral)
This order shall dispose of LPA Nos. 1099, 1102 and 1128 of 2014, as according to the learned counsel for the appellant(s), the issue involved therein is identical.
2. In LPA No. 1099 of 2014, filed under Clause X of the Letters Patent, the order dated 19.06.2014, passed in "CWP No. 12010 of 2014, titled as, Sandeep and others Vs. State of Haryana and others" of the learned Single Judge has been assailed.
3. Learned counsel for the appellant(s) submitted that the learned Single Judge while declining the prayer of the appellant(s) for declaration of Jawala Ram 2014.08.04 13:42 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document LPA No. 1099 of 2014 [2] the result had noticed as under:-
"That as for as declaration of final result is concerned, firstly, the answer sheets of the students have to be evaluated, secondly subject wise compilation has to be done for declaration of result. The result of Ist year and 2nd year will then be complied for preparation of transcript to be issued to the students. Then finally Diploma Certificate is issued to the students. Since, it is practically impossible to do all the aforesaid work within a short span of time i.e. Before 20.06.2014, so, it is not possible for the deponent to declare the result of the petitioners."
Thus, as per the averments of the aforementioned affidavit, this Court had observed that declaration of result before 20 th June, 2014 was not possible.
4. On a specific query being put to learned counsel for respondent No.2, as to whether the result of other candidates has been declared or not, he submitted that the result of other candidates has been declared. Learned counsel for respondent No.2 has urged that no detailed reply to the writ petition had been filed and plea regarding non-affiliation of respondent No.2 as well as the maintainability of the writ petition is also to be urged before the learned Single Judge.
5. In view of the above, the observation of the learned Single Judge cannot be sustained.
6. Accordingly, while setting aside the order dated 19th June, 2014, impugned herein, it is directed that the parties shall appear before the learned Single Judge on 08.08.2014 and it shall be open to the respondents Jawala Ram 2014.08.04 13:42 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document LPA No. 1099 of 2014 [3] to file a detailed reply before the Court, who shall thereupon proceed in the matter in accordance with law.
7. Disposed of accordingly.
(AJAY KUMAR MITTAL)
JUDGE
(JASPAL SINGH)
July 31, 2014 JUDGE
J.Ram
Jawala Ram
2014.08.04 13:42
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document