Disposed

Puneet Kapoor v. Panjab University Chandigarh

Punjab & Haryana HC7 Aug 2009CWP/11761/2009

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court disposed of a writ petition seeking directions to the Panjab University to decide the petitioner's representation regarding reservation for a Reader Anesthesia post without issuing a notice of motion, directing a decision within one month or before the interview date.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the respondent University to consider and decide the petitioner's representation dated 15.7.2009 in accordance with law, preferably within one month and prior to the interview date.

Puneet Kapoor Vs Panjab University Chandigarh — Service and Employment | Punjab & Haryana HC (2009)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.

¶2

C.W.P. No. 11761 of 2009

¶3

DATE OF DECISION : 07.08.2009

¶4

Dr. Puneet Kapoor

¶5

.... PETITIONER

¶6

Versus

¶7

The Panjab University, Chandigarh

¶8

..... RESPONDENTS

¶9

CORAM :- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SATISH KUMAR MITTAL

¶10

Present: Mr. A.P.S. Shergill, Advocate, for the petitioner.

¶11

¶12

SATISH KUMAR MITTAL , J. ( Oral )

¶13

The petitioner, who is holding the degree of MBBS, MD Anesthesia with more than 5 years teaching experience and is working as Senior Lecturer, Department of Anesthesia in Dr. Harvansh Singh Judge Institute of Dental Sciences, Sector 25, Chandigarh, Panjab University, has filed the instant petition for issuing direction to the respondent University not to reserve the single vacancy of Reader Anesthesia in the said Institute, for any particular category. Dr. (Mrs.) Urvashi Sharma, Senior Lecturer in Pedodontics in the same Institute, had filed the similar writ petition (CWP No. 11338 of 2009), which was disposed of by this Court on July 30, 2009, in the following terms :

¶14

CWP No. 11761 of 2009

¶15

-2-

¶16

“In view of the aforesaid facts, after hearing counsel for the petitioner and without issuing notice of motion, this petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent No.1 to consider and decide the representation dated 20.7.2009 (Annexure P-14) in accordance with law, expeditiously, preferably within a period of one month and in any case, prior to the date of holding the interview for the said post.”

¶17

Learned counsel for the petitioner states that the representation dated 15.7.2009 (Annexure P-7), given by the petitioner, may also be directed to be considered and decided by the authorities.

¶18

In view of the above, after hearing counsel for the petitioner and without issuing notice of motion, as it will un-necessary delay the matter, this petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondent University to consider and decide the representation dated 15.7.2009 (Annexure P-7) in accordance with law, expeditiously, preferably within a period of one month and in any case, prior to the date of holding the interview for the said post.

¶19

August 07, 2009 ( SATISH KUMAR MITTAL ) ndj JUDGE

Puneet Kapoor v. Panjab University Chandigarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Puneet Kapoor v. Panjab University Chandigarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Pavitra Devi Vs State of Haryana and Ors.

Satish Nandal Vs Haryana State Electronics Dev. Corp. Ltd.

Mahesh Chand Vs Dhbvn

Sanjiv Kumar and Ors. Vs Hy.St. and ORS.(MAIN6)

Shashi Sharma etc. Vs State of Haryana etc. (M1)

Krishna Devi and Ors. Vs U.H.B.v.N.Ltd. Kaithal