Petitioner sought writ of certiorari to quash selection of private respondents as Instructor Fitters. Court held petition premature as no appointment letter was issued and no pleading showed actual appointment. Petition dismissed.
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 & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
CWP No. 9233 of 2013 Date of decision: 01.05.2013
Ramkesh
.... Petitioner
Vs.
State of Haryana & others
.... Respondents.
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TEJINDER SINGH DHINDSA.
Present : Mr. D.R. Bansal, Advocate for the petitioner.
Tejinder Singh Dhindsa, J. (Oral).
The instant writ petition has been filed praying for the issuance of a writ in the nature of Certiorari for quashing the selection of private respondents No. 4 to 6 on the post of Instructor Fitters in the Department of Industrial Training, State of Haryana.
Counsel for the petitioner would concede that as of date no appointment letter have been issued to the private respondents. Mere selection does not result in indefeasible right to claim appointment to the post in question. In the absence of the pleadings on record to show that private respondents No. 4 to 6 have actually been appointed to the post in question, the prayer raised in the petition cannot be examined and looked into at this stage.
The writ petition is, accordingly, dismissed being held to be
premature.
01.05.2013 harjeet
( TEJINDER SINGH DHINDSA ) JUDGE
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the writ petition seeking quashing of private respondent selection is maintainable in absence of appointment.
Ramkesh
State of Haryana
Tejinder Singh Dhindsa
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
