← Library
High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCWP/26520/2017dismissed

Moh Kasim v. Punjab University And ORS.

2025-09-11Mr. Justice Jagmohan Bansal2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH **** 209-1 Date of Decision: 11.09.2025

1. CWP-26520-2017 (O&M) MOH KASIM

...Petitioner

Versus

PANJAB UNIVERSITY AND ORS.

...Respondents

2. CWP-29107-2019 RANJHA SINGH AND ANR

...Petitioners

Versus

PANJAB UNIVERSITY AND ORS.

...Respondents

CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAGMOHAN BANSAL Present:- Mr. Wazir Singh, Advocate for the petitioner (in CWP-26520-2017) Mr. Mohan Sheoran, Advocate for Mr. Dinesh Kumar Jangra, Advocate for petitioners (in CWP-29107-2019) Mr. Subhash Ahuja, Advocate for respondent-University Mr. R.K. Malik, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Samrat Malik, Advocate for respondents No.4 to 7 (in CWP-26520-2017) **** JAGMOHAN BANSAL, J. (ORAL) 1.

As common issues are involved in the captioned petitions, with the consent of both sides, the same are hereby disposed of by this common order. For the sake of brevity and convenience, facts are borrowed from CWP-26520-2017.

2.

The petitioner through instant petition under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India is seeking setting aside of order dated DEEPAK BISSYAN 2025.09.11 18:13 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CWP-26520-2017 -226.10.2017 (Annexure P-1) whereby respondent-University decided to regularize its temporary/ad hoc/contractual employees. 3.

The petitioner is assailing decision of regularization on the ground that it is contrary to judgment dated 10.04.2006 passed by Hon'ble Supreme Court in "Secretary, State of Karnataka and Ors. Vs. Umadevi and Ors." 2006 (4) SCC 1.

4.

The petitioner is not employee of the University. He had only applied for the post in 2012 against an advertisement which was later on cancelled. It is not a Public Interest Litigation. The petitioner has no locus standi to assail decision of regularization of the University. 5.

In the wake of above factual position, this Court is of the considered opinion that the instant petitions deserve to be dismissed and accordingly dismissed.

6.

Pending application(s), if any, also stands disposed of. (JAGMOHAN BANSAL) JUDGE 11.09.2025 Deepak DPA Whether Speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No DEEPAK BISSYAN 2025.09.11 18:13 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document