Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Punjab and Haryana · body

2025 DAILYLAW 64591 (PNJ)

SHANKEY JINDAL v. STATE OF HARYANA AND ANOTHER

CWP/20818/2019 · 2025-05-21

Jagmohan Bansal

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

CWP-20818-2019 1 103 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP-20818-2019 Date of Decision: 21.05.2025 SHANKEY JINDAL ......... Petitioner Versus STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS .….. Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAGMOHAN BANSAL Present : Mr. Vinod Gupta, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Raman Sharma, Addl. AG, Haryana. **** JAGMOHAN BANSAL , J. (Oral) 1. The petitioner through instant petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India is seeking setting aside of final result dated 08.06.2019 for the post of Lower Division Clerk (for short ‘LDC’) against advertisement No.3/2016 dated 20.02.2016 under category No.3 to the extent his name has not been included. He is further seeking direction to respondent to issue him appointment letter. 2. The petitioner claims that similarly situated persons filed writ petitions which were allowed and it was directed that revised selection list be prepared. Learned Advocate General made a statement before Division Bench to the effect that selected persons will not be ousted and would be adjusted against vacant posts. 3. Mr. Vinod Gupta submits that the respondent has selected many candidates who were not in the merit list. The petitioner has Asgar Ali 2025.05.21 16:37 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-20818-2019 2 secured 92 marks in the General Category and Jitender and Manisha who had secured 84 and 81 marks respectively have been selected in DHBVNL. The petitioner has not been selected because of pending writ petition. 4. Learned State counsel submits that case of petitioner would be re-considered in terms of orders passed by this Court in LPA No.2310 of 2017 titled as ‘Shikha and others Vs. State of Haryana and others’. 5. In the wake of statement of learned State Counsel, the present petition stands disposed of. 6. Let the needful be done within a period of two months from today. It is hereby made clear that petitioner’s date of joining shall be his date of appointment for all intents and purposes. He shall not be entitled to notional service benefits. ( JAGMOHAN BANSAL ) JUDGE 21.05.2025 Ali Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No Asgar Ali 2025.05.21 16:37 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document