High CourtsSingle Bench

Ranjit Kaur and Others vs State of Punjab and Others

Punjab And Haryana At Chandigarh · Decided on 2 March 2012 · Citation: (2012) 03 P&H CK 0263

HON’BLE JUDGES
Ajay Tewari, J
CASE NUMBER
C.W.P No. 4029 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

7 paragraphs · 177 words

Ajay Tewari, J.—Notice of motion.

2.

Ms. Kavita Arora, learned AAG, Punjab accepts notice on behalf of the respondents.

3.

Learned counsel for the petitioners undertakes to supply four copies of the petition to the learned AAG 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 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 for the parties are ad-idem that the controversy involved in this case is squarely covered by the decision of this Court dated 1.12.2009, rendered in CWP No.738 of 2009, Manjeet Kaur and others vs The State of Punjab and others.

6.

In these circumstances, this writ petition is disposed of in the same terms as in CWP No.738 of 2009.

7.

Copy of this order be given dasti to counsel for the respondents under the signatures of the Court Secretary.