Petitioners challenged an order inviting candidates for recruitment counselling, alleging some candidates were unqualified. The Court held the matter inappropriate for a writ petition at the current stage and advised filing a representation.
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.
134
In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana, at Chandigarh
Civil Writ Petition No. 600 of 2023
Date of Decision: 12.01.2023
Harmandeep Kumar and Others
... Petitioner(s)
Versus
State of Punjab and Others
... Respondent(s)
CORAM: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Anil Kshetarpal.
Present: Mr. Kamal Narula, Advocate for the petitioner(s).
Mr. Charanpreet Singh, Assistant Advocate General, Punjab, for the respondents.
Anil Kshetarpal, J.
(Anil Kshetarpal) Judge
January 12, 2023 “DK”
Whether speaking/reasoned :Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No
DEEPAK KUMAR BHARDWAJ 2023.01.16 11:22 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
3 issues framed by the court
Whether to entertain a writ petition seeking quashing of an order inviting candidates for counselling when some candidates may not meet qualification criteria.
Whether the petition is appropriate for judicial review or should be directed to be filed as a representation before the concerned authorities.
Whether the writ petition can be disposed of without entertaining the prayer for quashing.
Harmandeep Kumar and Others
State of Punjab and Others
Anil Kshetarpal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
