High CourtsSingle Bench

Anjali Rani vs State Of Haryana And Others

Punjab And Haryana At Chandigarh · Decided on 5 October 2020 · Citation: (2020) 10 P&H CK 0020

HON’BLE JUDGES
Ari Pal Verma, J
RESULT
Disposed Of
CASE NUMBER
Civil Writ Petition No. 15913 Of 2020

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

7 paragraphs · 222 words

Hari Pal Verma, J

The matter has been taken up for hearing through video conferencing due to outbreak of COVID-19.

The petitioner has filed this civil writ petition under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India for issuance of an appropriate writ, order or direction, especially writ in the nature of mandamus, so as to direct the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for scrutiny of documents and interview her against the 694 posts of TGT English (Rest of Haryana) as advertised against advertisement No.9/2015 (Category-1) (Annexure P-1).

After arguing for some time, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner would be satisfied in case the respondent No.2 i.e. Haryana Staff Selection Commission, Panchkula through its Secretary is directed to decide the representations dated 21.09.2020 and 22.09.2020 (Annexures P-16 and P-17 respectively) submitted by the petitioner in a time bound manner.

Learned State counsel does not have any serious objection to the aforesaid submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner.

Heard.

Without observing anything on the merits of the case, the present petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent No.2 to decide the representations dated 21.09.2020 and 22.09.2020 (Annexures P-16 and P-17 respectively) submitted by the petitioner, preferably within a period of 15 days from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.