Parveen Rani v. State Of Punjab

LPA-2322-2016 -1HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH LPA-2322-2016 Date of Decision: May 26, 2017 Parveen Rani .....Appellant

Versus

State of Punjab and others ......Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARI PAL VERMA 1.

To be referred to the Reporters or not?

Yes/No 2.

Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? Yes/No.

3.

Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes/No .......

Present:

Mr.MJS Bedi, Advocate for the appellant.

Mr.Anupam Singla, Advocate for respondent Nos.2 and 3.

........

SURYA KANT, J.

The instant Letters Patent Appeal is directed against the order dated 27.10.2016 whereby learned Single Judge has dismissed the appellant's writ petition in which she challenged the order rejecting her claim for appointment as Education Volunteer. Learned Single Judge has viewed that since no Education Provider was appointed after 29.4.2011, the relief sought by the appellant cannot be granted. [2] We have heard learned counsel for the parties. It is pointed out by learned counsel for the respondents-State that in somewhat similar circumstances one of us (Surya Kant, J.) in CWP No.14643 of 2011 Meenu 2017.06.02 15:56 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document chandigarh (Davinder Pal Kaur vs State of Punjab and others), decided on

LPA-2322-2016 -228.02.2012 and other connected cases, issued the following directions:- "4.

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and keeping in view the fact that the petitioners have gained sufficient experience as Education Volunteers, I deem it appropriate to dispose of these writ petitions with a direction to the respondents that as and when the respondents review and/or take a fresh policy decision in terms whereof they need to employ Education Volunteers and/or Teachers with different nomenclature but possession same qualifications, in that event, the petitioners be given preferential treatment with due weightage to their experience."

[3] We find that the appellant is a similarly placed candidate. Consequently, the order passed by learned Single Judge is modified and the instant appeal is disposed of in the above reproduced terms. ( SURYA KANT ) JUDGE May 26, 2017 ( HARI PAL VERMA ) meenuss JUDGE 1.

Whether speaking/reasoned ?

Yes/No 2.

Whether reportable ?

Yes/No Meenu 2017.06.02 15:56 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document chandigarh