Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Punjab and Haryana · body

2026 DAILYLAW 31124 (PNJ)

AKSHAMBARI SHARMA v. BAR COUNCIL OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AND OTHERS

CWP/20791/2026 · 2026-07-15

Sudeepti Sharma

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

CWP No. 20791-2026 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP No. 20791-2026 (O&M) Date of decision : 15.07.2026 Akshambari Sharma ....Petitioner versus Bar Council of Punjab and Haryana & ors. ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SUDEEPTI SHARMA Present: Mr. Ankur Mittal, Sr. Advocate assisted by Ms. Kushaldeep Kaur, Mr. Lalit Singla & Ms. Varsha Sharma, Advocates for the petitioner. None for respondent No. 1. Mr. Adarshdeep Singh, Advocate for respondent No. 2. Mr. Madhav Sinhal, Advocate for respondent Nos. 3 and 4. **** SUDEEPTI SHARMA , J. (Oral) 1. The present writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of writ in the nature of mandamus directing respondent Nos. 3 and 4 to forthwith declare the result of the petitioner for Semester II for the First year B.A. LL.B. (Hons.) in terms of the orders already passed by this Court and to grant all consequential academic benefits including restoration of access to the Student Portal/Student ID, permission to deposit the Semester III fee, registration in Semester III, making of attendance and participation in all academic activities. 2. Mr. Madhav Sinhal, Advocate, who is present in the Court, puts in appearance and filed his Vakalatnama on behalf of respondent Nos-3 and 4. 3. Learned counsel for respondent No. 2 on instructions from GAURAV ARORA 2026.07.17 16:04 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP No. 20791-2026 2 Ms. Vidya Bhaliva, Chief Legal Officer submits that the result of the petitioner for Semester II for the First year B.A. LL.B. (Hons.) has already been declared which the petitioner does not dispute. He further contends that all consequential academic benefits thereafter would automatically follow. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is not as on date aware of the same. 5. However, in view of the statement of learned counsel for respondent No. 2, the present writ petition is dismissed as having been rendered infructuous. 6. Pending application (s) if any also stands disposed of. July 15, 2026 (SUDEEPTI SHARMA) Gaurav Arora JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Yes Whether reportable No GAURAV ARORA 2026.07.17 16:04 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document