High Court Punjab-Haryana High Court

Rimpy vs State Of Punjab & Ors on 10 November, 2009

Punjab-Haryana High Court
Rimpy vs State Of Punjab & Ors on 10 November, 2009
        IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

                            CHANDIGARH.




                                     Civil Writ Petition No. 16474 of 2009

                            DATE OF DECISION : NOVEMBER 10, 2009




RIMPY

                                                     ....... PETITIONER(S)

                                 VERSUS

STATE OF PUNJAB & ORS.

                                                     .... RESPONDENT(S)



CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAI LAMBA




PRESENT: Mr. Kapil Kakkar, Advocate, for the petitioner(s).
         Ms. Charu Tuli, Senior DAG, Punjab.



AJAI LAMBA, J. (Oral)

Learned counsel for the respondent-State has apprised the

Court that the grievance of the petitioner has been addressed. A public

notice has been given in daily newspapers (Vernacular and English) of

today. The persons, such as the petitioner, are required to appear before a

Committee on 12.11.2009. The petitioner would be at liberty to approach

the Committee with material or evidence indicating that the certificate that

has been termed as bogus in the impugned order, was in fact, genuine. The
Civil Writ Petition No. 16474 of 2009 2

Committee would address the issue and pass a speaking and reasoned

order, in accordance with law.

Learned counsel for the respondent-State has further

informed the Court that earlier a public notice was given in newspapers

dated 31.10.2009. The persons were required to appear on 4/5.11.2009.

In case, the petitioner has already appeared and submitted the documents,

the same would be considered. After inquiry, a speaking and reasoned

order would be passed.

In view of the above, learned counsel for the petitioner states

that the matter be disposed of as infructuous.

Disposed of as infructuous.

November 10, 2009                                       ( AJAI LAMBA )
Kang                                                            JUDGE



1. To be referred to the Reporters or not?

2. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?