CWP-152225-2025 Page 1 of 2 IN THE HHIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 233 CWPP-15225-2025 Datee of Decision: 16.07.2026 Pooja Yadaav .… Petitioner Versus State of Haaryana and others .... Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDDHI GUPTA Present: - Mr. Kanwarnoor Singh Sethi, Advocate for Mr. Rao Ajender Singh, Advoocate for the petitioner. Mr. Suneel Ranga, DAG, Haryyana. NIDHI GUUPTA, J. (ORAL) 1. Prayer in this petition filed under Articles 226/227 of the Certiorari Constitutioon of India is for issuance of a wwrit in the nature of for quashinng the order dated 28.02.20255 (Annexure P-10) passed by respondentt No. 1 whereby the representatioon dated 09.02.2024 (Annexure P-7) submiitted by the petitioner has been r ejected, despite the fact that the petitioner hhas secured 50 marks i.e. more tthan the last cut-off 41.5 marks; Mandamus AND for iissuance of a writ in the naturre of directing the respondentts to consider/select the candiddature of the petitioner against Advertisemment No. 03/2023 dated 20.03.20023 (Annexure P-1) for the post of MPHWW(F) Health, Category No. 259 iin Group No. 32 as a selected candidate; AND directing the respondentts to keep one post vacant for appointmennt of the petitioner, during tthe pendency of present writ petition. 2. At the very outset learned couunsel for the petitioner submits that the preesent writ petition has been renndered infructuous, and may be RISHU KATARIA 2026.07.17 10:26

I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. CWP-152225-2025 Page 2 of 2 disposed oof as such, as vide Revisedd Result announced by the respondentts; the petitioner stands selectedd. As such, nothing survives in the presentt petition. 3. Copy of the Revised Result h anded over in Court by learned counsel forr the petitioner is taken on recordd. 4. Learned counsel for the responndent-State has not disputed the aforesaid suubmissions of learned counsel foor the petitioner. 5. Heard. 6. In view of the above, the pressent writ petition is disposed of as having bbeen rendered infructuous. 7. Pending application(s), if any,, shall also stand disposed of. 16.07.20266 ( NIDHI GUPTA ) rishu JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No RISHU KATARIA 2026.07.17 10:26 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment.

CWP-152225-2025 Page 1 of 2 IN THE HHIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 233 CWPP-15225-2025 Datee of Decision: 16.07.2026 Pooja Yadaav .… Petitioner Versus State of Haaryana and others .... Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDDHI GUPTA Present: - Mr. Kanwarnoor Singh Sethi, Advocate for Mr. Rao Ajender Singh, Advoocate for the petitioner. Mr. Suneel Ranga, DAG, Haryyana. NIDHI GUUPTA, J. (ORAL) 1. Prayer in this petition filed under Articles 226/227 of the Certiorari Constitutioon of India is for issuance of a wwrit in the nature of for quashinng the order dated 28.02.20255 (Annexure P-10) passed by respondentt No. 1 whereby the representatioon dated 09.02.2024 (Annexure P-7) submiitted by the petitioner has been r ejected, despite the fact that the petitioner hhas secured 50 marks i.e. more tthan the last cut-off 41.5 marks; Mandamus AND for iissuance of a writ in the naturre of directing the respondentts to consider/select the candiddature of the petitioner against Advertisemment No. 03/2023 dated 20.03.20023 (Annexure P-1) for the post of MPHWW(F) Health, Category No. 259 iin Group No. 32 as a selected candidate; AND directing the respondentts to keep one post vacant for appointmennt of the petitioner, during tthe pendency of present writ petition. 2. At the very outset learned couunsel for the petitioner submits that the preesent writ petition has been renndered infructuous, and may be RISHU KATARIA 2026.07.17 10:26

I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. CWP-152225-2025 Page 2 of 2 disposed oof as such, as vide Revisedd Result announced by the respondentts; the petitioner stands selectedd. As such, nothing survives in the presentt petition. 3. Copy of the Revised Result h anded over in Court by learned counsel forr the petitioner is taken on recordd. 4. Learned counsel for the responndent-State has not disputed the aforesaid suubmissions of learned counsel foor the petitioner. 5. Heard. 6. In view of the above, the pressent writ petition is disposed of as having bbeen rendered infructuous. 7. Pending application(s), if any,, shall also stand disposed of. 16.07.20266 ( NIDHI GUPTA ) rishu JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No RISHU KATARIA 2026.07.17 10:26 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment.