The High Court dismissed the present writ petition as infructuous because the petitioner retired and was subsequently re-employed under the Punjab Teachers Re-employment Act, 2006, rendering the challenge to the promotion order unnecessary. The Act was later repealed in 2009.
The petition has been disposed of as infructuous.
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.
CWP No. 13406 of 2008
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
CWP No. 13406 of 2008 DATE OF DECISION: August 03, 2010
Subhash Chander Batra
.........PETITIONER(S)
VERSUS
State of Punjab and others
......RESPONDENT(S)
CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAI LAMBA
Present: None for the petitioner(s).
Ms. Charu Tuli, Sr. DAG, Punjab.
Mr. Vikram Singh, Advocate, for Mr. Manu K. Bhandari, Advocate, for respondent no. 5.
AJAI LAMBA, J. (ORAL)
CWP No. 13406 of 2008
2
2006 was framed with the objective that there should not be any disruption in the studies of the students due to retirement of the teacher in an academic session. Learned counsel further contends that the Punjab School Teachers Re-employment Act has been repealed in 2009. The petitioner was allowed to continue on re-employment till 25.07.2008 and the petitioner has been paid for the said period. Learned counsel states that in view of these events,
the matter has been rendered infructuous.
03.08.2010 shivani
(AJAI LAMBA) JUDGE
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the writ petition seeking quashing of an order regarding post of a promoted teacher remains maintainable in view of the petitioner's retirement status.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Subhash Chander Batra
State of Punjab
Smt. Subtinder Kaur
AJAI LAMBA
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
