AJAY MODGIL(Not Applicable) vs THE ALL INDIA INSTITUTE OF MEDICAL SCIENCES AND OTHERS(Not Applicable) — CWP/2373/2026
Case under Constitution of India Section 226. Disposed: Contested--Disposed Off on 23rd March 2026.
CNR: HPHC010082532026
Filing Number
CWP/6936/2026
Filing Date
28-Feb-2026
Registration No
CWP/2373/2026
Registration Date
28-Feb-2026
Judge
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ajay Mohan Goel
Coram
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ajay Mohan Goel
Bench Type
Single
Judicial Branch
Civil Section
Decision Date
23-Mar-2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--Disposed Off
Last updated 26-Mar-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.AJAY MODGIL(Not Applicable)
Adv. Rajesh Kumar Parmar
Respondent(s)
-
1.THE ALL INDIA INSTITUTE OF MEDICAL SCIENCES AND OTHERS(Not Applicable)
Adv. DSGI 1123
-
2.The Executive Director(Not Applicable)
-
3.Harpreet Kaur(Not Applicable)
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
23-Mar-2026
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ajay Mohan GoelView PDF
Summary of CWP No. 2373 of 2026 Dr. Ajay Modgil challenged the selection of Dr. Harpreet Kaur as Assistant Professor (Anaesthesiology) at AIIMS Bilaspur. The High Court of Himachal Pradesh dismissed the petition after reviewing selection committee records, finding that the selected candidate scored 61/100 marks while the petitioner scored only 40/100 marks. The court noted that all committee members unanimously assessed the selected candidate as most meritorious and found no grounds to interfere with the selection. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
02-Mar-2026
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ajay Mohan GoelView PDF
-
02-Mar-2026
Office Objection
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ajay Mohan Goel
-
28-Feb-2026
Case filed
Registration No. CWP/2373/2026
Summary of CWP No. 2373 of 2026 Dr. Ajay Modgil challenged the selection of Dr. Harpreet Kaur as Assistant Professor (Anaesthesiology) at AIIMS Bilaspur. The High Court of Himachal Pradesh dismissed the petition after reviewing selection committee records, finding that the selected candidate scored 61/100 marks while the petitioner scored only 40/100 marks. The court noted that all committee members unanimously assessed the selected candidate as most meritorious and found no grounds to interfere with the selection. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts