IN THE PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARH 208 CWP-22422-2014 (O&M) Date of Decision: 14.05.2025 PARAMJIT KAUR TULSI ... Petitioner VERSUS UNION OF INDIA AND ORS ... Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD S. BHARDWAJ. **** Present: None for the petitioner. None for respondent No.1. Mr. I.S. Sidhu, Advocate for respondents No.2 and 3. **** VINOD S. BHARDWAJ, J. (ORAL) CM-10858-CWP-2016 Allowed as prayed for. The documents Annexures P-93 and P-94 are ordered to be taken on record subject to all just exceptions. Registry is directed to tag the same at appropriate place of the paper book. MAIN CASE Prayer in the present petition is for partially setting aside the decision taken by the Board of Governors in its 28th Meeting held on 01.10.2013. RAJENDER KUMAR 2025.05.15 07:02 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order CWP-22422-2014 (O&M) -2- It is evident from a perusal of the order sheets that the matter was listed on 14.08.2018 when the counsel for the petitioner prayed for some time to advance arguments and as such, the case was adjourned to 16.01.2019. The matter could not be taken up on that date and accordingly, the same was adjourned to 09.04.2019. On the said date, the case was adjourned yet again on the request of learned counsel for the petitioner and the same was ordered to be listed on 23.09.2019. On the said date, there was no representation on behalf of the petitioner and the case was thus adjourned to 31.01.2020. On the said date, the case was adjourned for 17.03.2020 on account of circulation of written request on behalf of the counsel for the petitioner. Thereafter, the case was taken up on 10.08.2022, when the case was adjourned for 04.04.2023 on the request of learned counsel for the petitioner. Thereafter, the matter has been taken up on 28.09.2023 and 21.11.2024; and on both these occasions, there was no representation on behalf of the petitioner. Accordingly, the matter stood adjourned for today i.e. 14.05.2025; but even today there is no representation on behalf of the petitioner. It appears that the petitioner is no longer interested in pursuing the instant writ petition. Dismissed for want of prosecution. (VINOD S. BHARDWAJ) MAY 14, 2025. JUDGE Rajender Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No RAJENDER KUMAR 2025.05.15 07:02 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order