Surinder Kuamr Shrama v. Union of India and Ors.
Case brief
What is this about?
Punjab and Haryana High Court, Chandigarh; CWP-13531-2002 (O&M); Surinder Kumar Sharma v. Union of India and Others; Coram: Jagmohan Bansal, J.; decided 05.09.2025. Petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India assailing promotion of respondent No.4; disposed of as infructuous upon counsel's statement that respondent No.4 has already retired; pending applications also disposed of; no merits adjudicated, no precedent value on the promotion question. Advocates: Arvind Kumar Bangar (petitioner); Dinesh Ghai and Amita Arora (respondent No.4). Useful only as an example of disposal for infructuity on retirement of the sole contesting respondent.
What did the court decide?
In view of the statement of Mr. Dinesh Ghai, Advocate (for respondent No.4) that respondent No.4 has already retired, the petition stands disposed of as having been rendered infructuous.