AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
B.S. Walia, J
Prayer in the writ petition is limited to appointment of a third Examiner as per rules and regulations applicable in view of there being difference of more than 15 marks in the evaluation conducted by the two examiners appointed by the respondent-University for Diploma in Anesthesia and M.S. (General Science) course in case of petitioner Nos.1 and 2 respectively.
Notice of motion.
Mr. Arun Kaundal, DAG, Punjab and Mr. K.S.Dadwal, Advocate, who are present in Court, accept notice on behalf of respondent No. 1 and respondent No.2 respectively.
Copy of the writ petition supplied to learned counsel for the respondents.
Learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent No.2 states that the petitioner has already submitted representation Annexure P-7 (Colly) and that in the circumstances, the writ petition can be disposed of by directing a decision to be taken on the same.
Learned counsel for the petitioner states that she has no objection to the writ petition being disposed of in the manner indicated above. However, prayer is that respondent No.2 be directed to take a decision on the representations dated 17.7.2019, 13.8.2019 and 16.8.2019 (Annexure P-7 colly) in a time bound manner.
In view of the statement of learned counsel for the parties, the writ petition is disposed of by directing respondent No.2 to take a decision and action as may be warranted in the facts and circumstances of the case on the representations dated 17.7.2019, 13.8.2019 and 16.8.2019 (Annexure P-7 colly) as per rules and regulations applicable within a period of 10 days from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.
Writ petition is disposed of with the aforementioned directions.