Research › Search › Judgment

Punjab High Court · body

2018 DIGILAW 445 (PNJ)

Jasbir Kaur v. State Of Punjab

2018-02-01

JITENDRA CHAUHAN

body2018
JUDGMENT Jitendra Chauhan. J. (Oral) - CM-1449-CWP-2018 The instant application is for issuance of directions to the official respondents to consider the names of the petitioners provisionally while recasting the select list to be prepared by respondent No. 2. 2. Reply on behalf of respondent No. 1 and 2 has been filed in the Court and the same is taken on record. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant-petitioner(s) contends that in view of the judgment rendered in CWP-12618-2014 titled as "Parminder Singh and others v. State of Punjab and others" decided on 15.12.2017 , the official respondents are going to recast the seniority list of all the candidates. However, the Court while passing the judgment had directed that benefit of the same will be confined up to the petitioners in that case. The present petitioners were not party in that case. It is further contended that the present writ petition had been filed by the petitioners in the year 2015 whereas the aforesaid judgment of Parminder Singh's case (supra) was decided on 15.12.2017. Therefore, it is prayed that the benefit of the judgment rendered in Parminder Singh's case may also be extended to the applicant-petitioners). 4. On the other hand, the stand taken by the official respondents is that the claim of the petitioner(s) is also liable to be considered in the light of aforesaid judgment passed in Parminder Singh's case (supra) after this Court condone the delay in filing the petition taking into consideration the fact that the instant writ petition filed in the year 2015 whereas the Parminder Singh's case was decided on 15.12.2017. 5. Heard. 6. Keeping in view the concession given by the State in the reply filed, this Court is of the opinion that it will be in the interest of justice if the benefit of Parminder Singh's judgment is extended to the present petitioners as the instant writ petition was filed in the year 2015 whereas Parminder Singh's case was decided on 15.12.2017. 7. Application stands disposed of and the main case is taken on today's board, with the consent of the parties. CWP-1088-2015 8. In view of the above, the official respondents are directed to consider and decide the case of the present petitioners in terms of Parminder Singh's case (supra). 9. 7. Application stands disposed of and the main case is taken on today's board, with the consent of the parties. CWP-1088-2015 8. In view of the above, the official respondents are directed to consider and decide the case of the present petitioners in terms of Parminder Singh's case (supra). 9. In case the competent authority feels that the relief claimed by the petitioners is not admissible or made out, in that case, a speaking order be passed in the matter. 10. Disposed of.