Writ petition rendered infructuous due to revision of the result and passing of a grade. Petitioner granted liberty to revive the petition if any grievance survives.
Petition disposed of as infructuous; liberty granted to revive if grievance survives.
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.
ANKUR GOYAL 2020.03.05 16:50 I attest to the accuracy and IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA authenticity of this document AT CHANDIGARH
Sr. No.242 CWP No.1977 of 2020 DATE OF DECISION: March 04, 2020
AMIT KUMAR
..PETITIONER
VERSUS
STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS
...RESPONDENTS
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR MITTAL
Present: Mr. Shadab Ahmad, Advocate for Mr. Pankaj Garg, Advocate, for the petitioner.
Mr. Harkesh Kumar, AAG, Haryana. *****
SUDHIR MITTAL, J. (ORAL)
Mr. G.S. Cheema, Advocate for Mr. Himanshu Raj, Advocate, puts in appearance on behalf of respondent No.2 by filing his vakalatnama and submits that the result of the petitioner has been revised and he has passed. Thus, the writ petition has been rendered infructuous.
Disposed of as having been rendered infructuous. However, the petitioner shall have liberty to get the same revived, in case, some grievance survives.
March 04, 2020 (SUDHIR MITTAL) Ankur JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No
(SUDHIR MITTAL)
36
AMIT KUMAR
STATE OF HARYANA
SUDHIR MITTAL
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
