Single judge dismissed a second appeal held to involve no substantial question of law. Delay was condoned. Court held civil court cannot correct adverse ACR entry absent proof of bias or mala fides.
Delay of 50 days condoned; second appeal dismissed as involving no substantial question of law.
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 FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
RSA No.2946 of 2014 (O&M) Date of Decision.27.11.2015
Dalip Singh
......Appellant
Versus
State of Haryana and others
......Respondents
Present: Mr. Arvind Kashyap, Advocate for the appellant.
CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. KANNAN
K. KANNAN J. (ORAL)
(K. KANNAN) JUDGE
November 27, 2015 Pankaj*
PANKAJ KUMAR 2015.12.01 12:18 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
3 issues framed by the court
Whether delay in refiling the appeal warrants condonation.
Whether civil court intervention is possible to correct an adverse entry in ACR without proof of personal bias or mala fides.
Whether the second appeal involves a substantial question of law.
Dalip Singh
State of Haryana
K. KANNAN
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
