Aman And Others v. State Of Haryana And Another

CWP-PIL-26235-2017

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH CWP-PIL-26235-2017 Date of Decision: February 07, 2019 Aman and others

...Petitioners

Versus

State of Haryana and others

...Respondents

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KRISHNA MURARI, CHIEF JUSTICE.

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN PALLI, JUDGE.

Present:

None for the petitioners.

Mr. Lokesh Sinhal, Addl. AG, Haryana, for respondent No. 1.

Mr. D.S. Rawat, Advocate, for respondent No. 2.

Mr. Sandeep Kumar Yadav, Advocate, for respondent Nos. 3 and 4.

KRISHNA MURARI, C.J. (ORAL) Case called out. No one has put in appearance on behalf of the petitioners to press this petition. However, with the aid of learned counsel appearing for the respondents we have gone through the pleadings. This petition has been filed with a prayer to quash the counselling notice/order (Annexure P-5), by which a special counselling session was organized by the Lala Lajpat Rai University of Veterinary and Animal Sciences, Hisar (respondent No. 2), for admission to Veterinary and PRASHANT KAPOOR 2019.02.08 12:42 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document

CWP-PIL-26235-2017 Livestock Development Diploma (VLDD) (two years duration) for the academic session 2017-18, after cut-off date. As per impugned counselling notice/order (Annexure P-5) the special counselling was slated for 16.11.2017 and 18.11.2017 and there is no dispute about the fact that the counselling is already over and on the strength of the same admissions have since been made in the year 2017 itself. Apart from this, the present writ petition, filed as a Public Interest Litigation on behalf of the petitioners, is not maintainable because the cause of a person, who may have been aggrieved with the impugned counselling process, cannot be espoused in public interest as he cannot be said to be so poor, downtrodden or belong to a economically weaker section of the society. Moreover, the persons who got admissions as a result of the counselling process have not been made a party. We are also informed that the aforementioned course of two years was started in the year 2017 and the same is near completion.

In view of the aforesaid facts, we are of the considered opinion that the petition at hands is rendered infructuous by afflux of time and accordingly stands dismissed.

(KRISHNA MURARI) CHIEF JUSTICE (ARUN PALLI) JUDGE February 07, 2019 Pkapoor Whether Speaking/Reasoned:

YES / NO Whether Reportable:

YES / NO PRASHANT KAPOOR 2019.02.08 12:42 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document