Disposed¶5

Davinder Singh v. State of Punjab & Anr.

Punjab & Haryana HC1 Jul 2025CWP/13299/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Punjab & Haryana High Court, Chandigarh; Davinder Singh v. State of Punjab; CWP-13299-2011 (O&M); decided 01.07.2025 by Aman Chaudhary, J.; counselling direction sought; Physical Training Instructor post; advertisement dated 21.10.2006; public notice dated 22.06.2011 Annexure P-3; B.P.Ed higher qualification exclusion; counter affidavit of Deputy Director dated 21.02.2014; no replication filed; petition disposed of with liberty to revive if lis survives; petitioner unrepresented (none present); State represented by Satnam Preet Singh, DAG Punjab.

What did the court decide?

No substantive relief; liberty reserved to the petitioner to seek revival of the petition by demonstrating that the lis still survives. ¶5

Davinder Singh Vs State of Punjab & Anr. — Punjab & Haryana HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

¶2

CWP-13299-2011 (O&M)

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

1367

¶5

CWP-13299-2011 (O & M) Date of decision: 01.07.2025

¶6

Davinder Singh ....Petitioner

¶7

Versus

¶8

State of Punjab and another ...Respondents **CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMAN CHAUDHARY *******

¶9

Present : None for the petitioner.

¶10

Mr. Satnam Preet Singh, DAG, Punjab.

¶11

*********

¶12

AMAN CHAUDHARY, J. (Oral)

¶13

Prayer made in the present petition is for directing the respondents to conduct the counselling of the petitioner as he had not been called for it on 08.07.2011 despite advertisement in the newspaper.

¶14

In para 3 of the petition, reference is made to the advertisement dated 21.10.2006 inviting application for a number of posts, including Physical Training Instructor and in para 4, there is an averment made by the petitioner, who had possessed B.P.Ed qualification, that he had applied for appointment to the said post but was not considered on the ground that he was possessing qualification higher than the basic and minimum prescribed therefor.

¶15

Learned State counsel refers to para 4 of the reply on merits filed by way of counter affidavit of Deputy Director on 21.02.2014, wherein the averments of the corresponding para of the writ petition were specifically denied being wrong, besides stating that the petitioner had tried to mislead the Court by pleading wrong facts, inasmuch as that he was not an applicant for the post of Physical Training Instructor in furtherance of advertisement dated 21.10.2006. Further reference is made to para 5 of the preliminary

¶16

HAMANT 2025.07.02 15:50 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶17

CWP-13299-2011 (O&M) 2

¶18

submissions of the said reply stating therein that the public notice dated 22.06.2011, Annexure P-3, was only for those candidates, who had applied pursuant to the advertisement dated 21.10.2006 and not for the petitioner, who was not an applicant thereto.

¶19

4. T o the aforesaid facts, there was no rebuttal made by filing any replication, even otherwise due to efflux of time, the prayer made in the present petition might not be surviving.

¶20

5. D isposed of, reserving the petitioner with a liberty to get it revived, by demonstrating that the lis still survives.

¶21

(AMAN CHAUDHARY) JUDGE 01.07.2025 Hemant Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes / No Whether reportable : Yes / No

¶22

HAMANT 2025.07.02 15:50 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Davinder Singh v. State of Punjab & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Davinder Singh v. State of Punjab & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Davinderpal Kaur Vs State of Punjab and Others

Sarabdeep Kaur and Another Vs State of Punjab and Others

Gaganpreet Kaur and Another Vs State of Punjab and Others

Sarvjit Kaur Vs State of Punjab and Anr.

Aruna Anand Vs Guru Nanak Dev University Amritsar & Anr.

Hardip Singh Vs State of Punjab and Ors.