High CourtsSingle Bench

Gurprem Singh vs State of Punjab and Others

Punjab And Haryana At Chandigarh · Decided on 2 March 2012 · Citation: (2012) 03 P&H CK 0351

HON’BLE JUDGES
Ajay Tewari, J
CASE NUMBER
C.W.P. No. 3992 of 2012
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

8 paragraphs · 229 words

Ajay Tewari, J.—Notice of motion.

2.

Ms. Kavita Arora, learned Assistant Advocate General, Punjab accepts notice on behalf of the respondents.

3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner undertakes to supply three copies of the petition to the learned Assistant Advocate General during the course of the day failing which this order shall be automatically recalled and the writ petition shall be deemed to have been dismissed for non-prosecution.

4.

Having regard to the nature of the order which I propose to pass, there is no necessity to call upon the respondents to file their counter-reply(ies)/affidavit(s), at this stage.

5.

Learned counsel cites that the case of the petitioner can be disposed of in terms of the judgment and order dated 23.1.2012 passed in C.W.P. No.1319 of 2012, Amandeep Kaur v. State of Punjab.

6.

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considering the relief sought by the petitioner but without expressing any views on his entitlement, I deem it appropriate to dispose of this writ petition with a direction to the respondents to consider the claim of the petitioner in the light of the Division Bench decision of this Court in Amandeep Kaur v. State of Punjab (supra).

7.

Disposed of in the same terms.

8.

A copy of this order be given dasti to the learned Assistant Advocate General, Punjab under the signatures of the Court Secretary.