Petitioner challenged apprehension of replacement by regular appointment despite having an appointment letter. Court held grievance far-fetched and dismissed.
Petitioner's grievance was dismissed as far-fetched and interim relief had already rendered the grievance infructuous.
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
CWP No.6908 of 2019 (O&M) Date of Decision.22.07.2019
Ankit Kumari
...Petitioner
Vs
State of Haryana and others ..Respondents
CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL
Present: Mr. Suresh Kumar Kaushik, Advocate for the petitioner.
Ms. Shruti Jain Goyal, DAG, Haryana.
-.-
AMIT RAWAL J. (ORAL)
Grievance of petitioner in present petition is that though she has been issued appointment letter and allocated posting but has apprehension that she would be replaced with regular appointment of Lecturers.
Counsel for State informs that process of regular appointment has not yet begun but replacement cannot be only ground to dispense with services of petitioner. It all depends upon the workload.
In such circumstances, grievance of petitioner as expressed is far fetched and cannot be vindicated at this stage. In view of appointment letter issued to petitioner, interim relief granted to her has rendered infructuous.
No ground for interference is made out.
Dismissed.
(AMIT RAWAL) JUDGE
July 22, 2019 Pankaj*
PANKAJ KUMAR 2019.07.31 14:09 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
Ankit Kumari
State of Haryana
Amit Rawal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
