Renu Tyagi v. State of Haryana & Ors.
Case at a glance
- Decided
- 09 Aug 2011
- Bench
- RANJIT SINGH
Provisions considered
- Constitution of India art. 12
Judgment
CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RANJIT SINGH
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.K.L.Dhingra, Advocate, for the petitioner. ***** RANJIT SINGH, J. A Division Bench of this Court in the case of Darshana Devi Versus State of Haryana and others , 2009 (1) PLR 174 has held on the basis of law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in State of Karnataka Versus Ameerbi, (2007) 11 SCC 681 that the person working as Anganwadi worker does not hold a civil post and the recruitment process is not governed by the Constitution or any Statute. That being the position, the writ petition could not be held maintainable as the authorities are not instrumentalities of State to be amenable to the definition of “State” under Article 12 of the Constitution of India. Counsel for the petitioner, if so advised, may avail the alternative remedy as may be available to the petitioner in accordance with law. The writ petition is, thus, dismissed with liberty to the petitioner to have the alternative remedy. August 09, 2011 ramesh ( RANJIT SINGH ) JUDGE
Questions this judgment answers
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Constitution of India — art. 12.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Punjab & Haryana High Court, on 09 Aug 2011. The bench was RANJIT SINGH.
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.