IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT 1217 Rakesh Kumar State of Punjab and other CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMAN CHAUDHARY Present: None Mr. Charanpreet Singh, AAG, Punjab Mr. Shivam Kapila, Advocate for Mr. Kapil Kakkar, Advocate for res *** AMAN CHAUDHARY, J. (Oral) 1. Prayer made in the present petition consider the petitioner for appointment as Excise and Taxation Inspector against one post reserved for 2. The pre including the petitioner had been selected against the post were meant for 3. Learned State counsel refers to para 3 of the reply wherein it has been stated that one Lokesh Kumar who was also applied under the said category w General Category Handicapped C secured 93 and 85 ma therefore placed at No.3 4. Disposed of, reserving the petitioner with a liberty to get it revived, by demonstrating that the 20.05.2025 ashok Whether speaking/reasoned : Whether reportable : IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP-13479 Date of decision: umar Versus Punjab and others HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMAN CHAUDHARY None for the petitioner. Mr. Charanpreet Singh, AAG, Punjab Mr. Shivam Kapila, Advocate for Mr. Kapil Kakkar, Advocate for res *** AMAN CHAUDHARY, J. (Oral) Prayer made in the present petition consider the petitioner for appointment as Excise and Taxation Inspector against one post reserved for Physically Handicapped. The premise of the relief claimed was that only 2 candidates including the petitioner had been selected against the post meant for Handicapped (Locomotor Disability) Category. Learned State counsel refers to para 3 of the reply wherein it has been stated that one Lokesh Kumar who was also applied under the said category was inadvertently shown at Sr. No.49 in the General Category, however, rectifying the same error Category, besides Gurvinder Singh who was at No.2 secured 93 and 85 marks, respectively, while therefore placed at No.3 and thus, could not be appointed. Disposed of, reserving the petitioner with a liberty to get it revived, by demonstrating that the lis still survives ( AMAN CHAUDHARY ) Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 13479-2009 (O&M) Date of decision: 20.05.2025 ..Petitioner ..Respondents HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMAN CHAUDHARY Mr. Charanpreet Singh, AAG, Punjab. Mr. Shivam Kapila, Advocate for Mr. Kapil Kakkar, Advocate for respondent No.3 Prayer made in the present petition for directing the respondents to consider the petitioner for appointment as Excise and Taxation Inspector against Physically Handicapped. mise of the relief claimed was that only 2 candidates including the petitioner had been selected against the post equal number of that isability) Category. Learned State counsel refers to para 3 of the reply wherein it has been stated that one Lokesh Kumar who was also a handicap candidate and had s inadvertently shown at Sr. No.49 in the the same error, he was appointed in the besides Gurvinder Singh who was at No.2, both having while, petitioner who secured 82 was could not be appointed. Disposed of, reserving the petitioner with a liberty to get it revived, ( AMAN CHAUDHARY ) JUDGE Yes/No Yes/No for directing the respondents to consider the petitioner for appointment as Excise and Taxation Inspector against mise of the relief claimed was that only 2 candidates equal number of that Learned State counsel refers to para 3 of the reply wherein it has candidate and had s inadvertently shown at Sr. No.49 in the he was appointed in the both having petitioner who secured 82 was Disposed of, reserving the petitioner with a liberty to get it revived, ASHOK KUMAR 2025.05.21 12:06 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document