Gurmeet Kaur And Another v. State Of Punjab And Others

-1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision: 06.07.2023 Gurmeet Kaur and another .... Petitioners

Versus

State of Punjab and others .... Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA

Present:

Mr. Satyendra Chauhan, Advocate, for Mr. P.S. Khurana, Advocate for the petitioners.

Mr. Vikas Arora, AAG, Punjab.

Mr. H.S. Saini, Advocate for applicants-respondents No.4 to 6.

***** SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA , J (ORAL) CM-10162-CWP-2023 This is an application for impleadment of the applicants as respondents No.4 to 6 being necessary party.

Learned counsel for the petitioner does not have any objection for their impleadment.

Heard.

In view of the averments mentioned in the application, the application is allowed subject to all just exceptions and the applicants are ordered to be impleaded as respondents No.4 to 6. Amended memo of parties is taken on record.

CM-10163-CWP-2023 This is an application for pre-poning the date of hearing of the

-2main petition from 16.08.2023 to some early date. Heard.

In view of the averments mentioned in the application, the application is allowed and the date of hearing of the main petition is preponed for today itself. CM-10164-CWP-2023 This application has been moved by the newly impleaded respondents No.4 to 6 stating that the issue involved in the present writ petition stands finally adjudicated by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court and this petition may be accordingly disposed of as the selections have been stopped because of the pendency of the petitions. He has relied upon a judgment passed in CWP-4035-2022 titled 'Satnam Singh and others Vs. State of Punjab and others', decided on 24.05.2023. Learned counsel for the petitioners does not dispute the applicability of the said judgment to the prior case. Accordingly, the application is allowed.

Main Case Having noticed above, this Court finds that the judgment in the case of Satnam Singh (supra), the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court has held as under:- "14. From the foregoing discussion, it is evident that the Court, in the matters of policy decision, is not expected to direct the Government to frame a particular policy, in a particular manner. The scope of jurisdiction in policy matters is well known and the Courts have been advised by the Supreme Court to desist from the temptation of interference in the policy matters.

15. Keeping in view the aforesaid facts and discussion, finding no merits, all the writs petitions are dismissed.

-316. All the pending miscellaneous applications, if any, are also disposed of."

Keeping in view the above, the present petition also stands dismissed mutatis mutandis.

The pending miscellaneous application, if any, shall also stand disposed of.

(SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA) 06.07.2023 JUDGE D.Bansal Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes/No Whether reportable :

Yes/No