Are you looking for a legal research tool ?
Get Started
Do check other products like LIBIL, a legal due diligence tool to get a litigation check report and Case Management tool to monitor and collaborate on cases.

Desh Raj Choudhary v. State Of Haryana And Others

Desh Raj Choudhary v. State Of Haryana And Others

(High Court Of Punjab And Haryana)

CWP-14172-2020 (O&M) | 02-09-2022

ARUN MONGA, J

1. Petition herein, inter alia, is for issuance of a writ in the nature of Certiorari for quashing rejection letter dated 05.09.2020 (Annexure P-8) issued by respondent No.3, whereby candidature of the petitioner for the post of District Horticulture Officer was rejected and for further directing the respondents to consider the name of the petitioner for the aforesaid post.

2. Pursuant to an earlier order dated 25.04.2022 passed by this court, result of the petitioner was produced on 01.06.2022. Same reveals that petitionerhas secured an aggregate of 73.765 marks (38.89 marks in the written examination + 34.875 marks in interview). The cut off marks for the waiting list of General Category are 74.35. it thus appears that petitioner was under wrong impression that he had secured more marks than the last selected candidate.

3. Seems to be a case of petitioner being unaware of his actual resultwas misled into filing the instant petition, premised on an understanding that he has obtained more marks in the aggregate than the last selected. However, he has actually scored lesser, as aforesaid.

4. The result of the petitioner is not under challenge before this Court. Being so, no further grounds to interfere are made out.

5. Dismissed.

Advocate List

  • Ms. Anna Bansal, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. R.K.S. Brar, Additional A.G., Haryana. Mr. Kanwal Goyal, Advocate for respondent-HPSC.

  • none

Bench
  • HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN MONGA
Eq Citations
  • NON-REPORTABLE
  • LQ/PunjHC/2022/17841
Head Note

Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 — Rule nisi issued by court against petitioner for criticizing court in the newspaper — Petitioner later expressed regret and unconditional apology — Held, apology tendered by petitioner is unequivocal and unconditional expressions of remorse — Role of courts is to uphold the majesty of law — Cause of justice and ends of justice would be better served if contempt proceedings are dropped — Contempt proceedings dropped.\n(Paras 1 to 5)