The writ petition was disposed of as having been rendered infructuous due to the petitioner's promotion, subsequent retirement, and deletion of other petitioners. An option was given to revive the petition by way of an application if any surviving cause of action persists.
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
CWP No. 17316 of 1995
Date of Decision: 5.2.2013
Dalip Singh Chatha
....Petitioner.
Versus
State of Haryana and others
...Respondents.
CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL.
PRESENT: None for petitioner No.3.
Ms. Palika Monga, DAG, Haryana.
Mr. H.S. Gill, Senior Advocate with Mr. Vivek Goyal, Advocate for respondents No.2 and 3.
AJAY KUMAR MITTAL, J.
Learned counsel for respondents No. 2 and 3 states that the names of petitioners No.1, 2, 4 and 5 were ordered to be deleted from the array of petitioners by this Court vide orders dated 22.12.1997 passed in C.M. Nos. 28197 of 1997 and 29094 of 1997. He further states that the petition survives only on behalf of petitioner No.3. He also states that during the pendency of the writ petition, petitioner No.3 was promoted as Assistant Secretary and thereafter as Deputy Secretary and had also retired from service. According to the learned counsel, the present writ petition has been rendered infructuous.
In view of the above, the present writ petition is disposed of as having been rendered infructuous. It shall, however, be open to petitioner No.3 to move an application for revival of the writ petition in case something survives therein.
February 5, 2013 (AJAY KUMAR MITTAL) gbs JUDGE
Dalip Singh Chatha
State of Haryana
AJAY KUMAR MITTAL
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
