Petitioner challenged retirement notice. Court found authority withdrew notice and permitted continuance of service; petition dismissed as infructuous.
Petition dismissed as 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.8876 of 2022 (O&M) Date of Decision.11.07.2022
Jeet Ram
...Petitioner
Vs
State of Haryana and others
...Respondents
CORAM:HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JAISHREE THAKUR
Present: Dr. Suresh Kumar Redhu, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. Tapan Kumar Yadav, DAG, Haryana.
-.-
JAISHREE THAKUR J. (ORAL)
The instant writ petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking to challenge retirement notice dated 15.04.2022 as conveyed to the petitioner.
Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that during the pendency of writ petition, the authority concerned has withdrawn the retirement notice vide order dated 02.06.2022 and the petitioner has been permitted to continue in service beyond the age of 55 years.
In view of the statement made by counsel for the petitioner,
nothing survives for consideration in the instant petition.
Dismissed as having been rendered infructuous.
(JAISHREE THAKUR)
JUDGE
July 11, 2022 Pankaj* Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No
PANKAJ KUMAR 2022.07.13 10:39 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document
Jeet Ram
State of Haryana
JAISHREE THAKUR
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
