Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Punjab and Haryana · body

2025 DAILYLAW 80681 (PNJ)

MOHAMMED v. STATE OF HARYANA AND ORS

CWP/20200/2025 · 2025-07-21

Jasgurpreet Singh Puri

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

CWP-20200-2025 (O&M) -1- 104 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP-20200-2025 (O&M) Date of Decision: 21.07.2025 Mohammed ....Petitioner(s) Versus State of Haryana and others .....Respondent(s) CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE JASGURPREET SINGH PURI Present: Mr. Salman Ahmed, Advocate, for the petitioner. **** JASGURPREET SINGH PURI , J. (Oral) 1. The present petition has been filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus directing respondents No.4 and 5 to enter the name of the petitioner in the register of the Haryana State Pharmacy Council and to issue a license to the petitioner and to decide the representations dated 19.05.2025 and 20.06.2025 (Annexure P-5). 2. On the face of it, the annexures attached with the present petition are absolutely illegible and cannot be read. The petitioner has ommitted to file typed or certified copies of the same and instead a prayer has been made in para (v) of the prayer clause for exemption from filing certified copies of Annexures P-1 to P-5. Such a prayer made by the learned counsel for the petitioner is hereby rejected. RAKESH KUMAR 2025.07.24 16:26 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment CWP-20200-2025 (O&M) -2- 3. This Court cannot proceed further with this case with totally illegible annexures and despite specific objections taken by the Registry of this Court, the objections were not removed. The prayer in the present petition is for deciding the representation (Annexure P-5), wherein there is nothing on the record to show as to by what method the aforesaid representation was given and as to whether it was given by registered post or e-mail etc. Even a query was raised to the learned counsel for the petitioner as to by what method, the aforesaid representation was given to which he states that it was given personally. 3. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the present petition is dismissed. 21.07.2025 (JASGURPREET SINGH PURI) rakesh JUDGE Whether speaking : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No RAKESH KUMAR 2025.07.24 16:26 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment