Punjab-Haryana High Court
Babu Lal vs State Of Haryana And Others on 20 April, 2024
Author: Harsimran Singh Sethi
Bench: Harsimran Singh Sethi
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:053042
CM-6119-CWP-2024 in/and CWP-32041-2018 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
2024:PHHC:053042
(101) CM-6119-CWP-2024 in/and
CWP-32041-2018
Date of Decision : April 20, 2024
Babu Lal .. Petitioner
Versus
State of Haryana and others .. Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI
Present: Mr. R.K. Malik, Senior Advocate, with
Mr. Anshul Labana, Advocate, for the applicant-petitioner.
Ms. Vibha Tewari, Assistant Advocate General, Haryana.
HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI J. (ORAL)
CM-6119-CWP-2024 Present application has been filed for fixing the main writ petition i.e. CWP No.32041 of 2018, at an early actual date and to dispose of the same keeping in view the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in SLP No. 4531 of 2023 titled as 'State of Haryana and others Vs. Balwinder Singh and others.
Notice of the application to the counsel opposite. Ms. Vibha Tewari, learned Assistant Advocate General, Haryana, accepts notice on behalf of the respondents.
Keeping in view the agreement between the learned counsel for the parties, the application is allowed and on their joint request, the main writ petition is taken up for hearing today itself.
1 of 2 ::: Downloaded on - 20-04-2024 21:13:31 ::: Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:053042 CM-6119-CWP-2024 in/and CWP-32041-2018 2 CWP-32041-2018
1. Learned senior counsel for the petitioner submits that after the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in SLP No. 4531 of 2023 titled as 'State of Haryana and others Vs. Balwinder Singh and others, a bunch of petitions involving the same question of law has been decided by this Court while passing order in CWP No.2158 of 2020 titled as Ashish Sharma and others vs. State of Haryana and others, decided on 13.03.2024 and the question of law raised in the present writ petition is also covered by the said judgment hence, the respondents are under an obligation to consider the claim of the petitioner for regularization under the policy dated 01.10.2003 keeping in view the parameters therein.
2. Learned counsel for the respondents has not been able to rebut the fact that the question of law raised in the present writ petition has already been decided by this Court while passing order in Ashish Sharma's case (supra).
3. Keeping in view the above, the present writ petition is also disposed of in terms of the judgment in Ashish Sharma's case (supra).
April 20, 2024 (HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI)
harsha JUDGE
Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No
Whether reportable : Yes/No
2 of 2
::: Downloaded on - 20-04-2024 21:13:31 :::