Petitioner confirmed compliance with the order. The petition was disposed of accordingly with rules discharged.
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.
HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
COCP No.2095 of 2011 (O&M) Date of Decision: 16.03.2012
Kuldip Kaur
. . . . . Petitioner
vs.
Rajni Sekhri Sibal, Director General, Haryana Institute of Public Administration, Gurgaon
. . . . Respondent
CORAM : HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT
1. 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. Kanhiya Soni, Advocate for Mr. Arun Bansal, Advocate for the petitioner
Mr. DD Gupta, Addl. AG Haryana
SURYA KANT J. (ORAL)
16.03.2012
vishal shonkar
(SURYA KANT) Judge
Kuldip Kaur
Rajni Sekhri Sibal
Surya Kant
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
