Lali Kumari v. State of Haryana & Ors.
Case at a glance
- Decided
- 09 Nov 2006
- Bench
- M M KUMAR, M M S BEDI
Outcome
Disposed of
Petition stands disposed of in the above terms
Provisions considered
- Constitution of India art. 226
Judgment
CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M. KUMAR HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M.S. BEDI PRESENT: Mr. L.R. Nandal, Advocate, for the petitioner. JUDGMENT M.M. KUMAR, J. (Oral) This petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution prays for quashing order dated 16.2.2004 (P-1) qua respondent No. 4, namely, Shri Dinesh Kumar, Hindi Teacher, who is stated to be junior to the petitioner. It has been asserted that he has been promoted illegally by ignoring the petitioner. The petitioner has also sought quashing of communication dated 10.10.2006 (P-8), whereby it has been intimated that correspondent in relation to clarification C.W.P. No. 17611 of 2006 2 regarding equivalency of the degree of M.A. (Hindi) examination from the Karnataka State Open Universty, Mysore as per book of Kurukshetra Universty, Kurukshetra, is going on and after receipt of the same, the case of the petitioner shall be considered. A further prayer has also been made for directing the respondents to promote the petitione from the date her junior has been promoted. As has been noticed above, for the relief claimed in the instant petition, the petitioner has already sent a legal notice, dated
Operative part
29.6.2006 (P-7) to the respondents, which is pending consideration. Without going into the merits of the case, we deem it just and appropriate to direct the respondents to take cognizance of the legal notice, dated 27.4.2006 (P-3) sent by the petitioners and decide the same expeditiously preferably within a period of four months from the date a certified copy of this order is presented to them. If the claim of the petitioners is found to be meritorious and decided in their favour then the benefit accruing to them shall be disbursed within a further period of three months thereafter. It shall be appreciated if a speaking order is passed. Petition stands disposed of in the above terms. (M.M. KUMAR) JUDGE (M.M.S. BEDI) November 9, 2006 JUDGE Pkapoor
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: Petition stands disposed of in the above terms
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Constitution of India — art. 226.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Punjab & Haryana High Court, on 09 Nov 2006. The bench was M M KUMAR, M M S BEDI.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.