Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
SHEEL NAGU, SUMEET GOEL
Diksha Kalson – Appellant
Versus
State of Haryana – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
SUMEET GOEL, J.
By way of review application bearing No.RA-CW-588-2025 (hereinafter referred to as ‘application in hand’) seeking review of the final order of judgment dated 28.02.2025 passed in CWP-4917-2025, the review-applicant/petitioner has implored this Court to review the aforesaid final order/judgment, whereby, the said writ petition preferred by her, was dismissed. Along-with application in hand, an application, i.e., CM-19192-CWP-2025 (hereinafter referred to as ‘delay condonation application’) seeking condonation of 260 days delay has also been preferred.
2. Shorn of non-essential details, the relevant factual matrix of the lis in hand is adumbrated thus:
i) The writ petition (CWP-4917-2025) was filed by the review-applicant/petitioner with the following substantive prayer:
“i. Issue a writ, order, or direction in the nature of Mandamus declaring Clause 33 of the Advertisement (Anneure P-1) to be ultra vires of the Constitution of India;
ii. Issue a writ, order, or direction in the nature of Mandamus to the Respondent No.2 and 3 to produce the Answer Sheet of English Paper IV of the Civil Judge (Junior Division) Examination – 2023-24 of the Petitioner bearing Roll N
Review jurisdiction is not an appeal; it addresses only material errors apparent on record, not new arguments or hearsay.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
