Disposed

Jagtar Singh v. State of Punjab & Ors.

Punjab & Haryana HC22 Nov 2016LPA/2276/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of a letters patent appeal challenging a Single Judge order declaring a writ petition regarding ex-servicemen reservation infructuous due to cancelled selection.

What did the court decide?

Appeal disposed of. Appellant given liberty to question future recruitment processes if made on contract basis or upon advertisement of regular posts without reservation.

Jagtar Singh Vs State of Punjab… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Punjab & Haryana HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶2

Letters Patent Appeal No.2276 of 2016 (O&M) Date of Decision: November 22, 2016

¶3

Jagtar Singh ......Appellant

¶4

versus

¶5

State of Punjab and others .....Respondents

¶6

CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT. HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SUDIP AHLUWALIA.

¶7

¶8

Present: Mr.Ranjodh Singh Sidhu, Advocate, for the appellant.

¶9

-.-

¶10

Whether Reporters of Local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?

¶11

To be referred to the Reporters or not?

¶12

Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?

¶13

¶14

Surya Kant, J . (Oral)

¶15

This letters patent appeal assails the order dated 11.08.2016 vide which the learned Single Judge has dismissed the appellant's writ petition, in a way, as infructuous. The question that arose for consideration before the learned Single Judge was whether or not the Ex-servicemen have got adequate representation as per their reservation in direct recruitment?

¶16

Learned Single Judge has observed that since the entire selection process for the recruitment of Panchayat Secretaries was cancelled, the issue raised by the appellant was rendered academic only.

¶17

We have heard learned counsel for the appellant.

¶18

The plea that subsequently appointments have been made on contract basis (and not on regular basis in which the appellant claims reservation), even if correct then it would be a separate cause of action for which the appellant may approach the Competent Authority. Similarly, as and when the posts are advertised on regular basis and if no reservation for Mohinder Kumar Kambojex-serviceman category as per the Punjab Recruitment of Ex-servicemen 2017.01.10 11:53 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh

¶19

[2]

¶20

LPA No.2276 of 2016 (O&M)

¶21

Rules, 1982 is provided, the appellant shall be at liberty to question such recruitment process.

¶22

With liberty afore-mentioned, the appeal stands disposed of.

¶23

[SURYA KANT] JUDGE

¶24

November 22, 2016 [SUDIP AHLUWALIA] mohinder JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether Reportable : Yes/No

¶25

Mohinder Kumar Kamboj 2017.01.10 11:53 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh

¶26

[3]

¶27

LPA No.2276 of 2016 (O&M)

¶28

CM No.4719 of 2016 in LPA No.2276 of 2016

¶29

Jagtar Singh versus State of Punjab and others

¶30

Present : Mr.Ranjodh Singh Sidhu, Advocate, for the applicant-appellant.

¶31

¶32

For the reasons mentioned in the application, the same is allowed subject to all just exceptions and 28 days' delay in re-filing the appeal is condoned.

¶33

CM stands disposed of.

¶34

(SURYA KANT)

¶35

JUDGE

¶36

November 22, 2016 (SUDIP AHLUWALIA) mohinder JUDGE

¶37

Mohinder Kumar Kamboj 2017.01.10 11:53 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh

Jagtar Singh v. State of Punjab & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jagtar Singh v. State of Punjab & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mahender Kalra and Anr. Vs State of Haryana & Ors.

Mantripat Kaur and Ors. Vs State of Punjab and Ors.

Devki Nandan & Ors. Vs State of Haryana and Ors.

M/S Indian Drugs & Pharmaceuticals Ltd. Vs Deepak Thukral & Ors.

Ishwar Singh and Ors. Vs State of Haryana and Ors.

Yashi Buildcon Pvt. Ltd. Vs State of Haryana & Ors.