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
11 paragraphs · 230 wordsJagmohan Bansal, J
As common issues are involved in the captioned petitions, with the consent of both sides, the same are hereby disposed of by this common order. For the sake of brevity and convenience, facts are borrowed from CWP-7285-2003.
The petitioner through instant petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India is seeking setting aside of order dated 22.02.2003 (Annexure P-3) whereby his name was removed from promotion list C-II.
A Division Bench of Court while issuing notice of motion on 13.05.2003 stayed operation of impugned order. The order dated
“Issue notice to show cause why petition be not admitted, returnable on 22.5.2003.
Mr. BS Sewak, DAG, Punjab, accepts notice and prays for time to seek instructions and file reply. Respondents shall produce service record of the petitioner before the Court on the next date of hearing.
Operation of the impugned order shall remain stayed till the next date of hearing.”
Name of the petitioner was brought on list C-II vide order dated 04.11.1992. In all probabilities, he might have retired.
In view of efflux of time and nature of impugned order, this Court deems it appropriate to make interim order dated 13.05.2003 absolute.
Disposed of with liberty to petitioner(s) to move an appropriate application within three months from today, if cause survives.
Pending application(s), if any, also stands disposed of.