SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2011 Supreme(Online)(P&H) 40

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
RAJIV KUMAR – Appellant
Versus
PB. SMALL INDUSTRIES & EXPORT CORP. LTD. – Respondent



In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh Reserved on: 21.1.2025 Date of Decision: 20.2.2025 Rajiv Kumar ......Petitioner Versus Punjab Small Industries and Export Corporation .....Respondents Limited and others

2. CWP No. 12689 of 2011 (O&M)

Shiv Kumar ......Petitioner Versus Punjab Small Industries and Export Corporation .....Respondent

3. CWP No. 12814 of 2011 (O&M) Suresh Juneja and others ......Petitioners Versus State of Punjab and others .....Respondents

4. CWP No. 5364 of 2014 (O&M)

Pardeep Kumar Aggarwal ......Petitioner Versus Punjab Small Industries and Export Corporation .....Respondents Limited and others

5. CWP No. 16250 of 2019 (O&M) Maninderjit Singh and others ......Petitioners Versus State of Punjab and another .....Respondents Sukhjit Kaur and others ......Petitioners Versus State of Punjab and another .....Respondents 7. CWP No. 15633 of 2019 (O&M) Sukhmani International ......Petitioner Versus State of Punjab and others .....Respondents 8. CWP No. 22270 of 2019 (O&M)

Thakur Dass .....Petitioner Versus Punjab Small Industries and Export Corporation .....Respondents Limited

9. CWP No. 15607 of 2019 (O&M)

Rajesh Kumar ......Petitioner Versus State of Punjab and others .....Respondents 10. CWP No. 16033 of 2019 (O&M)

Sameer Kumar ......Petitioner Versus State of Punjab and others .....Respondents Kuldeep Singh and others ......Petitioners Versus State of Punjab and others .....Respondents

12. CWP No. 1942 of 2020 (O&M)

Natasha Kumari ......Petitioner Versus State of Punjab and another .....Respondents

13. CWP No. 824 of 2020 (O&M)

Rajpal Singh ......Petitioner Versus State of Punjab and others .....Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESHWAR THAKUR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKAS SURI Argued by: Mr. Amit Jhanji, Sr. Advocate with Ms. Eliza Gupta, Advocate and Mr.Sahil Sehrawat, Advocate for the petitioner(s)

(in CWP-12959-2011 and CWP-12689-2011).

Mr. Sumeet Mahanjan, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Saksham Mahajan, Advocate for the petitioner(s)

(in CWP-16250-2019 & CWP-13573-2019).

Mr. Kanwaljit Singh, Sr. Advocate with Ms. Promila Nain, Advocate for the petitioner(s)

(in CWP Nos. 14573, 15633, 16033 of 2019 & CWP-824-2020)

and for respondent No. 28 (in CWP-12959-2011).

Ms. Harveen Mehta, Advocate for the petitioner (in CWP-15607-2019).

Mr. Ashish Gupta, Advocate for the petitioner (in CWP-1942-2020).

Ms. Supriya Garg, Advocate for the petitioner (in CWP-22270-2019) (through V.C.).

Mr. D.S. Sidhu, Advocate for Mr. Vikas Bali, Advocate (in CWP-12814-2011).

Ms. Munisha Gandhi, Sr. Advocate with Ms. Sachit Katoch, Advocate, Mr. Vikas Chatrath, Advocate &

Mr. Preet Agroa, Advocate, for the respondent-PSIEC.

Mr. Maninder Singh, Sr. DAG, Punjab.

Mr. Abhishek Singh, Advocate for respondent No.8 (in CWP-12959-2011)

and for respondent No.3 (in CWP-12814-2011).

Mr. Hoshiar Singh, Advocate for Mr. Sanjeev Sharma, Advocate for applicant-respondent No.1 (in CM-5723-CWP-2019 in CWP-5364-2014).

Mr. Sanpreet Singh Kalra, Advocate for Mr. S.S. Rangi, Advocate for respondents No.28 and 29 (in CWP-12959-2011).

****

SURESHWAR THAKUR , J.

1. Since all the petitions (supra) arise from a common advertisement, therefore, all the petitions (supra) are amenable to be decided through a common verdict being made thereons.

CWP Nos. 12959 of 2011, 12814 of 2011, 5364 of 2011, and 12689 of 2011

2. The writ petitions (supra) have been filed by the petitioners seeking a direction upon the respondent-Corporation concerned, to include their names in the draw of lots, which were to be held on 25.7.2011.

3. Moreover, in CWP No. 12689 of 2011 the petitioner also seeks

2025.02.21 10:30 the quashing of the letter dated 24.6.2011, wherebys he was informed that in the meeting held on 5.4.2011, he was found ineligible by the allotment committee. However, through an order dated 20.7.2011, passed by this Court, the petitioner was allowed to participate in the draw of lots, and in the said draw of lots, he was successful. The said order becomes extracted hereinafter.

“Notice of motion for

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top