Present: Mr. Dalbir Singh Advocate Vs. Govt. College Jind and Others - Court Judgment

SooperKanoon Citationsooperkanoon.com/1157246
CourtPunjab and Haryana High Court
Decided OnJul-21-2014
AppellantPresent: Mr. Dalbir Singh Advocate
RespondentGovt. College Jind and Others
Excerpt:
civil writ petition no.14010 of2014:{ 1 }: in the high court of punjab and haryana at chandigarh date of decision: july21 2014 santosh .....petitioner versus govt. college, jind and others ....respondents coram:- hon'ble mr.justice augustine george masih present: mr.dalbir singh, advocate, for the petitioner. ***** augustine george masih, j. (oral) petitioner has approached this court, praying for quashing of the advertisement dated 03.07.2014 (annexure p-1) and also an oral order dated 16.07.2014 passed/conveyed to him, denying him the right to join on the post of assistant professor “extension lecturer”. (college cadre) in government college, jind, district jind. it is the assertion of counsel for the petitioner that he has received a telephonic message that some other person has been appointed in pursuance to the interview, which was held on 10.07.2014 in place of the petitioner. he, however, is not aware of the name of the person, who has been appointed. in the absence of any information in this regard, a bald statement of counsel for the petitioner cannot be accepted and in any case khurmi rakesh 2014.07.22 10:11 i attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document civil writ petition no.14010 of2014:{ 2 }: the person who has been selected in place of the petitioner, as per the statement of counsel for the petitioner, being not a party to the writ petition, the present writ petition cannot be entertained. further, if the petitioner has an administrative grievance with regard to the action of the principal of the government college, jind, the remedy should have been availed of by him on the administrative side rather than rushing to this court. mere issuance of an advertisement does not indicate that it is with an intention to oust the petitioner, especially when nothing is on record except for the statement of counsel for the petitioner and averments in the writ petition, which are not supported by any document. the writ petition, therefore, stands dismissed as not maintainable at this stage. july 21, 2014 ( augustine george masih ) khurmi judge khurmi rakesh 2014.07.22 10:11 i attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
Judgment:

CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.14010 OF2014:{ 1 }: IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH DATE OF DECISION: JULY21 2014 Santosh .....Petitioner VERSUS Govt.

College, Jind and others ....Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH Present: Mr.Dalbir Singh, Advocate, for the petitioner.

***** AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH, J.

(ORAL) Petitioner has approached this Court, praying for quashing of the advertisement dated 03.07.2014 (Annexure P-1) and also an oral order dated 16.07.2014 passed/conveyed to him, denying him the right to join on the post of Assistant Professor “Extension Lecturer”.

(College Cadre) in Government College, Jind, District Jind.

It is the assertion of counsel for the petitioner that he has received a telephonic message that some other person has been appointed in pursuance to the interview, which was held on 10.07.2014 in place of the petitioner.

He, however, is not aware of the name of the person, who has been appointed.

In the absence of any information in this regard, a bald statement of counsel for the petitioner cannot be accepted and in any case Khurmi Rakesh 2014.07.22 10:11 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.14010 OF2014:{ 2 }: the person who has been selected in place of the petitioner, as per the statement of counsel for the petitioner, being not a party to the writ petition, the present writ petition cannot be entertained.

Further, if the petitioner has an administrative grievance with regard to the action of the Principal of the Government College, Jind, the remedy should have been availed of by him on the administrative side rather than rushing to this Court.

Mere issuance of an advertisement does not indicate that it is with an intention to oust the petitioner, especially when nothing is on record except for the statement of counsel for the petitioner and averments in the writ petition, which are not supported by any document.

The writ petition, therefore, stands dismissed as not maintainable at this stage.

July 21, 2014 ( AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH ) khurmi JUDGE Khurmi Rakesh 2014.07.22 10:11 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document