Manisha Gulati v. State Of Punjab And Others
! "
# $% "$"& '(#( Manisha Gulati ......Appellant(s)
Versus
State of Punjab and others ......Respondent(s) ' ) ( *(*(*+ , * ) *( *
Present:
Mr. Gurminder Singh, Advocate General, Punjab assisted by Ms. Harpriya Khaneka, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab for the applicant/respondents.
Mr. Chetan Mittal, Senior Advocate assisted by Mr. Mayank Aggarwal, Advocate for the non+applicant/appellant.
***** (*(*! "-!.!/ !,%0 1- $2340 %$ 5!/
Application has been filed for grant of leave/permission to allow the State Government to appoint Chairperson of the Punjab State Commission for Women, in view of the earlier order dated 17.04.2023. It is the case of the State that since vide the said order, the Coordinate Bench had noticed that since the process for appointment to the said post has been initiated, it had been ordered that, the same was not to be finalized without the leave of the Court. As per the application, the Selection Committee had met on 06.07.2023 and shortlisted three names for the said post, as per Annexure A+1 and the said names were recommended to the Hon'ble Chief Minister, Punjab for appointing one suitable applicant to the said post.
It is a matter of record that the writ petitioner/appellant herein had been granted an extension of the term for three year vide notification dated 18.09.2020 (Annexure P+6) from 19.03.2021 to 18.03.2024, which is now coming to an end. Even otherwise the said extension was withdrawn on NAVEEN NAGPAL 2024.03.15 09:56 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment.
Chandigarh
07.03.2203 (Annexure P+12), which was subject matter of challenge before the learned Single Judge in CWP+5198+2023, which was dismissed on 28.03.2023. The present appeal arises out of the said judgment. Vide interim order dated 31.07.2023, the appellant was also permitted to continue to occupy the house till the next date. Even otherwise the term of the appellant is coming to an end.
Faced with this situation, Mr. Mittal submits that he has instructions that the appellant does not want to press the present appeal, provided she be given protection to retain the house till 31.03.2024 and no penal rent would be charged for the period she was in occupation. He further submits that the appellant would vacate the premises by 31.03.2024. Resultantly, keeping in view the above, we prepone the hearing of the main case from 22.04.2024 to today itself. The appeal is taken on board for hearing. Application is allowed, accordingly.
# In view of the above, the present appeal is dismissed as withdrawn by binding down both the parties to the statement made by the counsels. However, we clarify that we have not decided the issue on merits and the question of law, thus, remains open.
(*(*+ * (#(
Whether speaking/reasoned :
√Yes No Whether Reportable :
Yes √No NAVEEN NAGPAL 2024.03.15 09:56 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment.
Chandigarh