High CourtsSingle Bench

Anju Rani vs State of Punjab and Another

Punjab And Haryana At Chandigarh · Decided on 13 December 2010 · Citation: (2010) 12 P&H CK 0282

HON’BLE JUDGES
Ajai Lamba, J
CASE NUMBER
Civil Writ Petition No. 22173 of 2010

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

5 paragraphs · 156 words

Ajai Lamba, J.—The Petitioner being desirous ofjoining Punjab Civil Services (Executive Branch)applied to Punjab Public Service Commission. The Respondents, however, have included the Petitioner in the list of candidates who are ineligible to take the examination on account of some infirmity in the Application Form(s).

2.

Learned Counsel admits that the Petitioner did not file objections in response to public notice issued by the Respondents inviting objections/ representations. The representations, rather were filed on 4.10.2010, 3.11.2010 and 23.11.2010 vide Annexure P-4, P-5 and P-6, respectively.

3.

In view of the above, I do not find any ground to issue mandamus directing the Respondents to consider the representation and take a decision on the representation. The Petitioner was required to be active in filing representation within the specified period as given in the public notice. The Petitioner, however, remained dormant.

4.

No ground for interference in extraordinary writ jurisdiction is made out.

5.

The petition is dismissed.