Mamta Rani v. Vinay Kumar And ANR

COCP No.680 of 2025

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH COCP No.680 of 2025 DATE OF DECISION :- 03.03.2025 Mamta Rani

...Petitioner

Versus

Vinay Kumar and another

...Respondents

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARKESH MANUJA Present:- Mr. Vikrant Koundal, Advocates for the petitioner. Mr. Amit Aggarwal, DAG, Haryana.

*** HARKESH MANUJA , J.

(Oral) 1.

Learned counsel representing the respondents on instructions relies upon a communication dated 20.02.2025 to submit that the name of the petitioner has been recommended for the post of TGT Home Science under Rest of Haryana category and she shall be granted appointment along with place of posting within three weeks from today. 2.

In view of the above, learned counsel for the petitioner does not press the present petition.

3.

Dismissed as not pressed.

4.

Rule stands discharged.

5.

However, in case the needful is not done within the aforementioned period, as per the undertaking, the petitioner would be at PARVINDER SINGH 2025.03.05 09:25 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment

COCP No.680 of 2025 liberty to seek revival of the contempt petition and in that eventuality, the erring/concerned officer would be liable to pay a sum of Rs.50,000/-as cost(s) from his/her own pocket in favour of the petitioner towards litigation expenses, immediately i.e. on the first date of listing of revival application. (HARKESH MANUJA) JUDGE 03.03.2025 P.Singh Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No PARVINDER SINGH 2025.03.05 09:25 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment