The petition, filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, was dismissed for non-prosecution as the petitioners failed to appear despite repeated calls.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Civil Writ Petition No.12623 of 1991 Date of Decision 23.11.2010
Pargat Singh and another
...... Petitioners
VERSUS
Secretary to Government, Punjab, Education Department, Chandigarh and others
...... Respondents
CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.N.JINDAL
Present: None for the petitioners.
Mr.Amit Chaudhary, Asstt. Advocate General, Punjab, for the respondents-State.
A.N.JINDAL, J:
Despite several calls, none has put in appearance on behalf of
the petitioners. It appears that they are no more interested in pursuing the present petition.
Dismissed for non-prosecution.
(A.N.Jindal) Judge
23.11.2010
mamta-II
Pargat Singh
Secretary to Government, Punjab, Education Department
A.N. Jindal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
