SUDESH KUMAR GOYAL Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) We had heard Shri Rakesh Dahiya learned counsel for the appellant, as well as Shri Raju Ramachandran, learned senior counsel for the respondents. Ms. (Dr.) Monika Gusain had appeared for the State of Haryana and was also heard.

(2.) The common judgment and order dtd. 18/5/2010 passed by the Division Bench of the Punjab & Haryana High Court deciding 12 writ petitions, more particularly, writ petition No.16211 of 2009 is under challenge in the present appeal. The bunch of the above writ petitions were partially allowed but the appellant was not accorded any relief insofar as his appointment to the higher judicial service of the State under direct recruitment quota was concerned.

(3.) Before adverting to the two legal issues which have been addressed by Shri Rakesh Dahiya in assailing the impugned judgment and order, we consider it appropriate to briefly narrate the facts leading to the filing of the writ petition and now the appeal arising therefrom.