vegeta/nlplegal · Datasets at Hugging Face

text stringlengths 1 26.8k
"finest hour of justice".
The Hon'ble Supreme Court in B.S.Joshi and others v. State
of Haryana, 2003(4) SCC 675 has observed that it becomes the duty of the
Court to encourage genuine settlements of matrimonial disputes.
Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of this case, it
would be in the interest of justice to quash the abovesaid FIR as no useful
purpose would be served by continuance of the present proceedings. It will
merely lead to wastage of precious time of the court and would be an
exercise in futility.
This petition is, thus, allowed and FIR No. 179 dated
10.10.2016 registered under Sections 406, 498A IPC at Police Station City
Muktsar, District Sri Muktsar Sahib alongwith all consequential
proceedings are, hereby, quashed.
However, liberty is afforded to respondent No.2 to file
necessary application for revival of the proceedings in the above said FIR,
in case the terms and conditions of settlement between the parties are not
adhered to by the petitioner(s) or it is found that the settlement was a mere
ruse to have the aforesaid FIR quashed.
(Lisa Gill)
August 08, 2017 Judge
rts
Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No
Whether reportable : Yes/No
3 of 3
::: Downloaded on - 12-08-2017 04:06:51 :::
<\|endofjudgement\|>
Punjab-Haryana High Court
Ms.Aaarti Khanna And Another vs The State Of Punjab And Others on 25 September, 2013 C.W.P. No.19751 of 1996 -1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.
C.W.P. No.19751 of 1996 (O&M)
DATE OF DECISION : 25.9.2013
Ms.Aaarti Khanna and another PETITIONERS
VERSUS
The State of Punjab and others RESPONDENTS
CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MAHESH GROVER
Present:- Shri Angel Sharma with Ms.Bhavnik Mehta, Advocates for the
petitioners.
Shri Nilesh Bhardwaj, A.A.G. Punjab.
MAHESH GROVER, J.
The petitioners have filed the instant petition with a prayer that the
resolution/orders Annexures P-23, P-24, P-26, P-27, P-28, P-28/A, P-29, P-33 and
P-34 be quashed. Actually, the petitioners seek the quashing of the order dated
26.3.1996 (Annexures P-28 and P-28/A) vide which their services were
terminated.
By virtue of Annexure P-1, the respondent/management of Shivalik
Model School, Naya Nangal (hereinafter referred to as the school) had inserted an
advertisement for recruiting Trained Graduate Teachers in various disciplines such
Dass Ghanshyam
2013.09.30 11:06
I am the author of this
document
high court chandigarh
C.W.P. No.19751 of 1996 -2-
as Physics, Chemistry, Biology and Math. One of the eligibility conditions
amongst the others was that the incumbent should have the qualification of B.Ed.
with 50% marks. Concededly, the petitioners were not having this qualification,
but after selection, they were given one year's time to acquire this qualification.
Condition No.12 incorporated in the letter of appointment specifically indicated to
this effect. The petitioners were to remain on probation for a period of two years.
It is pertinent to state here that petitioner no.1 acquired the qualification of B.Ed.
with 50% marks in April, 1995 and petitioner No.2 acquired the same in
September, 1995.
The respondents then passed the order of termination of the services
of the petitioners by virtue of Annexure P-28 and P-28/A on the ground that the
services of the petitioners were no longer required. No other reason was assigned
in the impugned order. But the real reason is revealed in the minutes of the
meeting which have been placed on record.
Immediately prior to the termination orders being passed, the
Managing Committee held a meeting on 16.11.1995 and one of the agendas for
consideration was the appointment of teachers made in March, 1995 (the process
in which the petitioners were also appointed). It is noticed therein that the
petitioners and other similarly situated persons have filed writ petition in this Court
in which no interim orders have been given and that the Officiating Principal had
reported that as per the appointment letters, the appointments were purely
temporary and the teachers were on probation for a period of two years. A
decision was taken to relieve all the employees selected in the year 1995
immediately. The impugned orders were passed thereafter.
The petitioners contend that the real motive to terminate their
services was the reason that the Managing Committee which undertook the process
of appointment was replaced by another Committee illegally and all the decisions
Dass Ghanshyam
2013.09.30 11:06
I am the author of this
document
high court chandigarh
C.W.P. No.19751 of 1996 -3-
taken by the erstwhile Managing Committee were sought to be rescinded.
A reference has been made to the resolution passed in a meeting
dated 12.5.1995 wherein it was noticed that the term of the Committee expired on
1.6.1994 and thus on the date when selections were made, there was neither any
managing committee nor any selection sub-committee authorized to make
selections. It was also noticed that the appointments were not in accordance with
the rules as some of the appointed candidates were not having the B.Ed. degrees
which was contrary to the rules and hence their appointments be cancelled.
Learned counsel for the petitioners refers to Annexure P-1 which
would indicate that the term of the erstwhile Managing Committee had been
extended upto 1997 vide orders dated 16.6.1995. This aspect of the matter has not
been denied by the respondents.
From the above, it transpires that when the initial appointments were
made by the Managing Committee, its term had already expired on 1.6.1994 and

"finest hour of justice".

The Hon'ble Supreme Court in B.S.Joshi and others v. State

of Haryana, 2003(4) SCC 675 has observed that it becomes the duty of the

Court to encourage genuine settlements of matrimonial disputes.

Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of this case, it

would be in the interest of justice to quash the abovesaid FIR as no useful

purpose would be served by continuance of the present proceedings. It will

merely lead to wastage of precious time of the court and would be an

exercise in futility.

This petition is, thus, allowed and FIR No. 179 dated

10.10.2016 registered under Sections 406, 498A IPC at Police Station City

Muktsar, District Sri Muktsar Sahib alongwith all consequential

proceedings are, hereby, quashed.

However, liberty is afforded to respondent No.2 to file

necessary application for revival of the proceedings in the above said FIR,

in case the terms and conditions of settlement between the parties are not

adhered to by the petitioner(s) or it is found that the settlement was a mere

ruse to have the aforesaid FIR quashed.

(Lisa Gill)

August 08, 2017 Judge

rts

Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No

Whether reportable : Yes/No

3 of 3

::: Downloaded on - 12-08-2017 04:06:51 :::

<|endofjudgement|>

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Ms.Aaarti Khanna And Another vs The State Of Punjab And Others on 25 September, 2013 C.W.P. No.19751 of 1996 -1-

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.

C.W.P. No.19751 of 1996 (O&M)

DATE OF DECISION : 25.9.2013

Ms.Aaarti Khanna and another PETITIONERS

VERSUS

The State of Punjab and others RESPONDENTS

CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MAHESH GROVER

Present:- Shri Angel Sharma with Ms.Bhavnik Mehta, Advocates for the

petitioners.

Shri Nilesh Bhardwaj, A.A.G. Punjab.

MAHESH GROVER, J.

The petitioners have filed the instant petition with a prayer that the

resolution/orders Annexures P-23, P-24, P-26, P-27, P-28, P-28/A, P-29, P-33 and

P-34 be quashed. Actually, the petitioners seek the quashing of the order dated

26.3.1996 (Annexures P-28 and P-28/A) vide which their services were

terminated.

By virtue of Annexure P-1, the respondent/management of Shivalik

Model School, Naya Nangal (hereinafter referred to as the school) had inserted an

advertisement for recruiting Trained Graduate Teachers in various disciplines such

Dass Ghanshyam

2013.09.30 11:06

I am the author of this

document

high court chandigarh

C.W.P. No.19751 of 1996 -2-

as Physics, Chemistry, Biology and Math. One of the eligibility conditions

amongst the others was that the incumbent should have the qualification of B.Ed.

with 50% marks. Concededly, the petitioners were not having this qualification,

but after selection, they were given one year's time to acquire this qualification.

Condition No.12 incorporated in the letter of appointment specifically indicated to

this effect. The petitioners were to remain on probation for a period of two years.

It is pertinent to state here that petitioner no.1 acquired the qualification of B.Ed.

with 50% marks in April, 1995 and petitioner No.2 acquired the same in

September, 1995.

The respondents then passed the order of termination of the services

of the petitioners by virtue of Annexure P-28 and P-28/A on the ground that the

services of the petitioners were no longer required. No other reason was assigned

in the impugned order. But the real reason is revealed in the minutes of the

meeting which have been placed on record.

Immediately prior to the termination orders being passed, the

Managing Committee held a meeting on 16.11.1995 and one of the agendas for

consideration was the appointment of teachers made in March, 1995 (the process

in which the petitioners were also appointed). It is noticed therein that the

petitioners and other similarly situated persons have filed writ petition in this Court

in which no interim orders have been given and that the Officiating Principal had

reported that as per the appointment letters, the appointments were purely

temporary and the teachers were on probation for a period of two years. A

decision was taken to relieve all the employees selected in the year 1995

immediately. The impugned orders were passed thereafter.

The petitioners contend that the real motive to terminate their

services was the reason that the Managing Committee which undertook the process

of appointment was replaced by another Committee illegally and all the decisions

Dass Ghanshyam

2013.09.30 11:06

I am the author of this

document

high court chandigarh

C.W.P. No.19751 of 1996 -3-

taken by the erstwhile Managing Committee were sought to be rescinded.

A reference has been made to the resolution passed in a meeting

dated 12.5.1995 wherein it was noticed that the term of the Committee expired on

1.6.1994 and thus on the date when selections were made, there was neither any

managing committee nor any selection sub-committee authorized to make

selections. It was also noticed that the appointments were not in accordance with

the rules as some of the appointed candidates were not having the B.Ed. degrees

which was contrary to the rules and hence their appointments be cancelled.

Learned counsel for the petitioners refers to Annexure P-1 which

would indicate that the term of the erstwhile Managing Committee had been

extended upto 1997 vide orders dated 16.6.1995. This aspect of the matter has not

been denied by the respondents.

From the above, it transpires that when the initial appointments were

made by the Managing Committee, its term had already expired on 1.6.1994 and