Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Punjab and Haryana · body

2025 DAILYLAW 89722 (PNJ)

SUKHWANT SINGH v. STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS

CWP/24150/2024 · 2025-07-07

Kuldeep Tiwari

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

109 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP-24150-2024 Date of Decision : 07.07.2025 SUKHWANT SINGH .....Petitioner VERSUS STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS .....Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP TIWARI Present : Mr. A.D.S.Jattana, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Sahil R. Bakshi, AAG, Punjab. KULDEEP TIWARI, J.(Oral) 1. Through the instant writ petition filed under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India, a prayer is made for setting aside the recommendations dated 05.09.2024 (Annexure P-15), whereby respondent no.3, had recommended to respondent no.2, the name of father of respondent no.6, to be prefixed before the Government High School, Landran, under the instructions dated 17.12.2020 (Annexure P- 10). 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that earlier the Gram Panchyat concerned, by making a resolution dated 04.03.2023 (Annexure P-12), and even the SMC of the School concerned, recommended the name of the father of the present petitioner to be pre- fixed before 'the Government High School, Landran', however, all that has been ignored by making the impugned recommendation. 3. During the course of hearing this Court, was informed by the learned State counsel, on instructions imparted by Mr. Gurcharan Singh, DHARAM VIR 2025.07.09 10:51 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-24150-2024 -2- Sr.Assistant, District Education Office, Mohali, that the impugned recommendation, is still pending consideration before the Director, School Education Board (Sr. Sec.), Secondary Education Branch, SAS, Nagar. 4. He further submits that the petitioner can raised his grievance before the Director concerned, by making a detailed representation, and the latter concerned, shall consider the same in view of the apt policy. 5. In view of the fact that till date the recommendation (supra), has not been accepted, this Court finds that the instant petition is a premature motion. Therefore, the petitioner is relegated to the Director, School Education Board (Sr. Sec.), Secondary Education Branch SAS, Nagar. 6. In case, the petitioner moves a detailed representation by raising all the issues, as have been raised through the instant petition before the Director concerned within a period of 10 days from date of passing of this order, the latter concerned, shall make its all endeavours to decide the same within a period of 02 months thereafter. 7. Disposed of accordingly. (KULDEEP TIWARI) July 07, 2025 JUDGE dharamvir Whether speaking/reasoned. : Yes/No Whether Reportable. : Yes/No DHARAM VIR 2025.07.09 10:51 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document